Individualism and egoism remain strong patterns in the moral reasoning of many professionals, but they influence moral reasoning patterns among students.
Ethical Attitudes of Students and Business Professionals: A Study of Moral Reasoning
ABSTRACT. A quesdonnaire on business ethics was adminisrered 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.
How do business professionals and business students reason when confronted with moral dilemmas? Do they share the same basic moral reasoning or do they differ significandy? Is one group more sensitive to moral issues than the other group? This article has three goals: (l) To provide answers to the above questions on the basis of a questionnaire given to business professionals and students. (2) To examine these answen within the broader context of American culture. (3) To draw some general observations and conclusions regarding the moral reasoning of our respondents.
fohnA. Wood Justin G. Longenecker Joseph A. McKinney Carlos W. Moore
Individualism and the moral consensus In a 1982 book by Darrell Reeck, entitled Ethia for the Professions, the author argued that American society needs a creative moral consensus, which is a shared judgment among good-willed and reasonable people about the moral qualities of a situation that moves each party toward deeper insight than she or he would have attained individually.' This consensus would promote positive moral behavior and provide a general guideline for public morality. But Reeck went on to discuss the possibility that a certain consensus might be destructive rather than creative and then concluded that the emerging moral consensus in our society is destructive because it is based largely on egoism. An egoist judges situations by asking, "What's in it for me?"^ Although Reeck's book is directed toward the more traditional professions, he notes that business management is an "emerging profession"^ and, therefore, his analysis can be applied more broadly to the general business climate.
Reeck's analysis is confirmed by the recently published and celebrated book. Habits of the Heart, written by a team of five, with the final rewritii^ done by the best-knovm member of the team, Robert BellaL The title comes from a phrase used by the French social philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville in his famous Democracy in America. Tocqueville described American individualism with a mixture of admiration and anxiety. The authors of Habits fear John A. Wood is Associate Professor or Religion at Baylor University. that this individualism may have grown cancerous.* Justin G. Longenecker is Emeritus Chavanne Professor of Christian Bellah and his associates trace three central Ethics in Business at Baylor University. strands of American culture: (1) biblical, (2) republiJoseph A. McKinney is Professor of Economics and Co-Director of can, and (3) utilitarian and expressive individualism. Master of Intemationai Management Program at Baylor UniTheir point is that we have abandoned much of the versity. Carlos W. Moore is an Edwin W. Streetman Professor ofMarketing first two while individualism has marched inexorably at Baylor University. through our history. John Winthrop is cited as a good
foumal of Business Ethics 7 (1988) 249-257. © 1988 hyKluwer Academic Publishers.
250
John A. Wood etal.
example of the biblical emphasis in our history. WintLrop wrote: "We must delight in each other, make others' condition our own, rejoice together, moum together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our community as membere of the same body."' Although the Puritans were not uninterested in material success, their fundamental criterion for human success was the creation of a community in which genuine ethical and spiritual life could be lived.* Thomas Jefferson is said to embody the best ofthe republican tradition in American history. Jefferson's belief in political equality was possible only in a republic where the citizens actually participated. He feared that "our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless" if the people became involved "in the sole faculty of making money." ^ Neither Winthrop nor Jefferson believed in a notion of formal fi^eedom that would simply allow people to do what they pleased — for example, solely to make money. The utilitarian and expressive individualism strand finds its expression in the lives of Benjamin Franklin and Walt Whitman. Franklin was the poor boy who got ahead on his own initiative. But for many of those who were influenced by Franklin, the focus was so exclusively on individual self-improvement that the larger social context hardly came into view.* Although Franklin never believed it, the idea that social good would automatically emerge when each individual pursued his own interest had gained some acceptance by the end of tte 18th century. This utilitarian individualism became so dominant by the middle of the 19th century that it set off a number of reactions. Emerson, Thoreau, and Haw^ome put aside this search for wealth in favor of a deeper ailtivation of the self' But Walt Whitman is the best example of "expressive individualism." For Whitman, success had little to do with material acquisitions. A life rich in experience, openness to all kinds of people, and a life of stror^ feeling, was what he perceived to be a successful life. "Freedom to Whitman was above all the fireedom to express oneself, against all constraints and convention."'" Tocqueville described this individualism as "a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and fiiends; with this litde society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves the greater society to look after itself""
Tocqueville viewed this individualism and isolation as severe threats to the future of American freedom. The authors of Habits are terribly concerned that this individualism is so pervasive that it threatens the very foundations of American society. "This is a society in which the individual can only rarely and with difficulty understand himself and his activities as interrelated in morally meaningful ways with those of other, different Americans." '^ In popular parlance, the kind of attitude described by Reeck and Bellah is called "Looking Out for No. 1." Some philosophers call it psychological egoism. Borchert and Steward note several features of this viewpoint'^ It claims that every act and every motive of every human being is ultimately selfish or egoistic. Also, those who hold this view are making a factual claim; that is, they are merely stating a fact, not approving or disapproving this behaviour. This is a crucial point for our upcoming analysis ofthe ethical views of business students and businesspersons. As we shall see, many of these people didn't defend this attitude but seemed to conclude that "this is just the way things are and I have to Hve in this kind of world." In addition, one ofthe laws of nature for this view is to defend oneself by all means possible.'* Some of the students and businesspersons in our survey seemed to reflect this essentially siege mentality. In the "dog-eat-dog world of business" and in this "jungle" they felt forced to engage in activity which was morally abhorrent Not to do so was to guarantee non-survival. This lay behind the oftrepeated statement that someone must do the questionable behaviour because "he's got a family to feed."
Moral reasoning of business professionals and students To discover the ethical perceptions of the business community, a questionnaire was sent to a broad cross section of business managers and other professionals. A total of 2267 out of 10000 persons responded. Table I provides a profile ofthe respondents. This same questionnaire was later administered to 205 upper class students in a course in business ethics. The heart of the questionnaire was comprised of sixteen situations, each involving an ethical
251
Ethical Attitudes TABLEU
TABLE I Profile of respondents Industry
Manufacturing Transpoitation/Conununicadon/Public Utilities Services Construction Finance/Insurance Government
Wholesale/Retail Other
43.5% 11.6%
8.7%
63% 5.2% 3.4% 4.7% 16.3%
Number of Employees Under 20 20-99 100-249 250-999 1000-10000 Over 10 000
19.4% 16.6% 10.6% 14.1% 21.0% 18.2%
Age ofRespondent
30 or under 31-40 41-50 51-60 61 or over
9.6% 29.5% 28.8% 22.6%
9.4%
Organizational Level
Top management Middle management Other management and professional personnel
33.5% 35.3% 31.2%
dilemma. The sixteen vignettes are listed in Table II, and the statistical comparision between the professionals and the students is provided in Table III. The respondent was asked to circle a number from one to seven, with one being "never acceptable" and seven being "always acceptable." Space was provided for comments. The comments proved to be the most illuminating data of all, because they indicated why persons answered as they did. Before examing some of the more revealing situations separately, some general observations can be made. (1) Roughly eight to ten percent of both the students and those in the business world appear to be
A. An executive earning $50000 a year padded his expense account by about $1500 a year. B. In order to increase profits, a general manager used a production process whicli exceeded legal limits for environmental pollution. C. Because of pressure from his brokerage firm, a stockbroker recommended a type of bond which he did not consider a good investment D. A small business received one-fourth of its gross revenue in the form of cash. The owner reported only onehalf of the cash receipts for income tax purposes. E. A company paid a $350000 "consulting" fee to an official of a fore^n country. In return, the official promised assistance in obtaining a contract which should produce $10 million profit for the contracting company. F. A company president found that a competitor had made an important scientific discovery which would sharply reduce the profits of his own company. He then hired a key employee ofthe competitor in an attempt to learn the details ofthe discovery. G. A highway building contractor deplored the chaotic bidding situation and cutthroat compedtioiL He, therefore, reached an understanding with other major contractors to permit bidding which would provide a reasonable profit H. A company president recognized that sending expensive Christmas gifts to purchasing agents might compromise their positions. However, he continued the policy since it was common practice and changing it might result in loss of business. I. A corporate director learned that his company intended to announce a stock split and increase its dividend. On the basis of this information, he bought additional shares and sold them at a gain followii^ the announcement J. A corporate executive promoted a loyal friend and competent manager to the posidon of divisional vice president in preference to a better qualified manager with whom he had no close des. K. An engineer discovered what he perceived to be a product design fiaw which consdtuted a safety hazard. His company declined to correct the flaw. The engineer decided to keep quiet, rather than taking his complaint outside the company. L A controller selected a legal method of financial reporting which concealed some embarrassingfinancialfacts which would otherwise have become public knowledge. M. An employer received applicadons for a supervisor's posidon from two equally qualified applicants but hired the male applicant because he thought that some employees might resent being supervised by a female.
252
John A. Wood etal.
Tablell (continued)
N. As part of the marketing strategy for a product, the producer changed its color and marketed it as "new and improved," even though its other characteristics were unchanged. O. A cigarette manu&cturer launched a publicity campaign challenging new evidence from the Surgeon General's ofBce that cigarette smoking is harmful to the smoker's healtL P. An owner of a small firm obtained a free copy of a copyrighted computer software program from a husiness friend rather than spending $500 to obtain his own program from the software dealer.
TABLE III
Comparison of students' and business professionals' responses to vignettes Means Situation
Business
Students
Significance
A B
1.52 1.58 1.70 1.81 3.16 3.58 2.42 3.06 2.09 3.25 2.30 3.87 3.22 2.94 3.64 2.92
2.80 1.79 2.32 2.09 4.14 3.30 3.96 4.29 3.77 3.11 1.88 4.07 3.20 3.05 3.61 4.28
0.000 0.006 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.064 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.260 0.000 0.137 0.853 0.410 0.838 0.000
c D E F G H I
J K
L M ^.
N O P
Strongly egoistic and unprincipled. These persons marked a "seven" on many of the cases, showing no regard to moral dimensions. These are the extreme egoists. Nothing legal, moral, or interpersonal will stand in their way of pursuing their own interests to the limit Neither motives nor consequences
mattered. What mattered is what they wanted and they would stop at nothing, apparently, to achieve their ends. (2) Many people view college students as being more idealistic than their elders. Conventional \visdom says that the college student has not experienced the real world of moral ambiguity and tends to view situations in more black and white terms. Not having yet experienced the ambivalence of life, it is reasoned, students likely will be more rigid morally and more certain that something is wrong. As college professors who tend to share this view, we were stunned at the findings. In seven of the sixteen situations, the students were significandy more willing to engage in a questionable activity tlian were their elders in the business world. Statistical significance is measured at the 0.05 level. In only one situation did the score of business people indicate a signficantly greater approval of a questionable activity. In the other eight situations, the differences between business people and students were not statistically significant. The college student of today, as has been noted in many quarters, is not the idealistic student of the 1960s who was out to make the world a better place in which to live. This seems to be particularly true of many business students. One professor in a northern university concluded from his teaching of business ethics that the attitude of his students could be characterized as "careerist." Anything is acceptable if it furthers one's career. Egoism has replaced idealism for many college students. (3) The Reagan Revolution has signaled a sv^ing to a more conservative mood in the country. This conservatism has made much of the virtues of the free enterprise market system. Anything resembling a socialistic tendency has been roundly condemned Yet, for some in our survey, free enterprise competition appears to be any means which enables one to gain an upper hand in the struggle for success. Ostensibly, some of those who may be the most outspoken in their defense of free enterprise are those who are willing to stretch the boundaries of the system for their own personal gain. This is egoism in search of a rationale. It is also an egoism that is self-deceptive. (4) For over two decades Lawrence Kohlberg of Harvard has interviewed scores of people in an effon to discern their moral logic. His conclusion is that
Ethical Attitudes there are diree distinct levels of moral reasoning and that each of these levels contain two stages.'' 1. Pre-conventional level: Stage One: The reward and punishment stage. All persons begin here. We do what is right in order to avoid punishment. (Parent to child: T)on't play in the street or I'll spank you!") Stage Two: The individualism and reciprocity stage. As we grow older we still act out of selfinterest but recognize that other people have their interests also. Thus we enter into "deals" in order to secure our interests ("You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours"). 2. Conventional level: Stage Three: The interpersonal conformity stage. Here we live up to what is expected of us by people close to us (family, friends) or by society in general. Stage Four The law and order or social system stage. At this stage one meets one's obligations in order to keep the system as a whole going. Thus, morality is merely obeying the laws and rules of society. 3. Post-conventional level: Stage Five: The social contract stage. At this stage one is concerned that laws and duties be based on rational calculation of overall utility, e.g., "the greatest good for the greatest number." Stage Six: The univenal principles stage. At this stage one believes in the validity of such universal moral principles as justice, equality, and the dignity of all human beings, and has a sense of personal commitment to them. Kohlberg says that very few people reach this stage. Kohlberg's disconcerting conclusion is that most Americans never move heyond Stage Four. Morality is, in essence, limited to obeying die rules and laws of society. Kohlberg's conclusion regarding the moral reasoning level of most Americans is confirmed by our questionnaire. On vast numbers of comments about why an activity was wrong, the rationale given was that it "was against the law." This reason was sufficient for many people. No further examination was needed. Since the system would break dovm "if everyone did it," it is wrong. Awareness of the possibility of any fundamental principles involved is lacking. Furthermore, if there is no law against an
253 , then, ipso facto, it is morally acceptable to do
it To be sure, the comments from the respondents provide examples of moral reasonii^ in all three of Kohlberg's levels, but the vast majority appear to be operating within the Conventional level.
Situations where business professionals and students agree In eight of the sixteen ethical situations there was statistically no significant difference (at the 0.05 level) between the business professionals and the students. Two of these have been selected to illustrate the common moral logic employed to justify behavior. Situation One: In order to increase profits, a general manager used a production process which exceeded legal limits for environmental pollution. Business professionals scored 1.58; students 1.79. The general public has been made aware of the serious problems of pollution. College textbooks deal with the issue and the EPA has made its presence felt in business life. Extensive travel for business and recreational purposes exposes students and business professionals alike to environmental deterioration. So it is not surprising that our respondents reacted strongly against this type of behaviour. Many b'usinesspeople expressed dissatisfaction with the EPA ("the EPA should be eliminated" said one), feeling that their standards were "arbitrary," "too tough," "ridiculous," and "unrealistic." In spite of this and similiar rhetoric ("most environmentcJists are wrong," "news media propaganda"), most people wzint to protect the environment. Some business respondents focused on the consequences of pollution ("hurting our children," "cheating our future generations") whereas others expressed a fear of punishment ("risk of jail" — Kohlberg's Stage 1). Students expressed similiar sentiments, although Kohlberg's Law and Order Stage (Stage 4) was more in evidence. "The law is the law no matter what the costs are." "Against the law." "There will usually be a fine" (Stage 1 or 4). Other students exhibited PostConvendonal moral reasoning: "The govemment is there as a watchdog because business fails to keep
254
John A. Wood etal.
their social contract" "(Business) should be concerned with the environment even beyond the legal limits." "People's Uves are more important their jobs." Situation Two: "A small business received onefourth of its gross revenue in the form of cash. The owner reported only one-half of the cash receipts for income tax purposes." Business scored 1.81; students 2.08. The business respondents vented a good deal of anti-government feeling which prompted some to favor income tax evasion: "Big govemment is bad;" "Not yet. As we move towards a sociahstic govemment this will become necessary." "I feel that small business cannot survive otherwise." "Most people cheat a little so he is not doing something that others donotdo;" "Governmenttaxestoohigh - theytend to screw small business, so let'em get some back!" But many saw this practice as clearcut cheating: "Theft, even from government, is not acceptable, even when it is felt that the govemment does not manage its money properly." "If everybody does that, the tax system will collapse" (Stage 4); "I do think we are being taxed to death. Changes should be wrought legally" (Stage Five?). The students expressed the same general feelings. Some saw it as wrong because it was illegal (Stage 4), while others were against it because of the consequences (others pay, govemment raises taxes, etc., post-conventional reasoning). Sdll others were hostile toward the IRS: "Those who work hard are raped enough as it is by the IRS, why not kick them around for a change?" As in the case of the businesspeople, the harsh rhetoric seldom led respondents to advocate cheating.
Situations with significant differences between business professionals and students In seven of the sixteen cases, the students scored significandy higher (at the 0.05 level) in their willingness to engage in a questionable activity. Five of these cases merit some discussion. Situation One: "An executive earning $50000 a year padded his expense account by about $1500 a year."
Business scored 1.52 students 2.79. It is noteworthy that seventy-five percent of business professionals marked "never acceptable" while only twenty-four percent of the students marked it One might expect business people to be more wiUing to engage in such behavior. After all, they already have jobs and family and would appear to be more financially vulnerable than students. But it may be that business people are more sensitive to this because they work for a specific company with real people whom they care for, whereas to the student this is more abstract Or, students may beheve with some in the general public that companies make excessive profits and will not miss the $1500. Many respondents in business were strongly against this practice: "It is a symptom of a society without character," "He should be terminated." Others were more ambivalent: "It is more acceptable if $50 000 is comparatively low to other companies in the same industry;" "If he honestly felt he was underpaid and the company would not respond he may be justified;" "It is acceptable if he is recovering out-of-pocket expenses caused by unrealistic company/govenunent policies." Few students condemned expense account padding. Some of this might represent uncleamess or ignorance regarding travel expenses due to lack of experience. Or it might indicate that this generation of students is more egoistic and ambitious than their elders. "Padding is o.k. unless it is done every year." "If it bettered his company and his client and did not damage anyone." "It depends on the use of the expense account" To be sure, a 2.79 score indicates relatively strong leaning against this practice. But since the score is significandy higher than that of business professionals, there is some cause for concern. Situation Two: "Because of pressure from his brokerage firm, a stockbroker recommended a type of bond which he did not consider a good investment" Business scored 1.70; students 2.32. Sixty-five of business people said "never;" 31% of students said "never." Both business and students resist such pressure, with business once again having a clearer focus on the dangers of this behaviour. Those in business against it cited a number of reasons: "You have to be able to sleep at
Ethical Attitudes
^ (conscience); He'll lose his client eventually" (consequences); "This professional should be put on the streer," "This violates the basic ethical and moral rules governing broker/client relations" (A professional places his client's interest first). Students offered the same rationale: "Investors may rely totally on this person's advice. This may hurt the brokerage firm in the long mn" (Consequences combined with die focus on the client); "He shouldn't recommend anything that he wouldn't do himself" (an example of John Rawls' "veil of ignorance," i.e., when one is faced with a moral dilemma he chooses without knowing which position he will have in the situation). Yet, others reflected egoistic utihtarianism: "The only acceptable situadon would be one where the person couldn't afford to lose his job" (Stage 2); "If" it is good for the company and legal" (Stages 3 and 4: Keep the law but do what is good for the company and stockbroker, client's interests are ignored). Situation Three: "A highway building contractor deplored the chaotic bidding situation and cutthroat competition. He, therefore, reached an imderstanding with other major contractors to permit bidding which would provide a reasonable profit" Business scored 2.41; students 3.96. Fifty-one percent of business said "never," ten percent of students said "never." A substantial difference exists between the two groups. The students are clearly more willing to subvert the "free enterprise system" which they so gready defend against socialism. It appears thiat some are only defending their own interests. Half of the businesspersons completely rejected this type of collusion and price-fixing ("Totally defend the purpose of biddii^ to protect the public interest" "Usually the people who complain of 'shooter bidding' and cutthroat competition consider 'obscene profits' reasonable"). A number of others sympathized Awith the contractor but offered no alternatives to price-fixing. ("The bidding system is expensive, unfair, and promotes shoddy, cheap work." "As long as it was only to cut down on unnecessary costs handed over to tax payers"). Almost all the students' comments justified the action of the contractor. "Good business practice." "That's business; you must make a profit to stay in operation." "Monopolization is not always bad."
255
Those who were against it were primarily concerned about long term consequences. Situation Four: "A company president recognized that sendir^ expensive Christmas gifts to purchasing agents might compromise their positions. However, he continued the policy since it was common pracdce and changing it might result in loss of business." Business scored 3.05; students scored 4.29. Twenty-nine percent of business said "never," eight percent of students said "never." Business professionals exhibited a wide divergence of perception. Many see it as a common practice while many others see it as a practice beginning to dissipate in many areas of business. Possibly this reflects a difference among industries. Those against it felt that "most good companies do not allow their PA's to take gifts." Other reasons cited: "We have tried it all; it does no good" (consequences); "If not against company written policy" (law and order); "The offer is not unethical; the acceptance is " (double standard). In spite of many comments against the pracdce, the 3.05 score indicates that the practice is still widespread and that sentiment against it is not as strong as we found on some of die other issues mentioned in the survey. If business people were ambivalent about Christmas gifts, students were more so. They were much more willing to allow it, in spite of some misgivings. Egoistic utilitarianism was more evident in the student population. " If it truly would result in the loss of business." "It is in a sense a bribe to someone, but if they want to spend the money and it helps business, fme." One respondent offered this convoluted logic: "If it has been common practice, keep on doing it If he was just starting out it wouldn't be acceptable." The apparent logic is: don't accept moral responsibility if that's the way business operates. Play by the rules of the game. But to start a bad policy is immoral! Situation Five: "An owner ofa small firm obtained a free copy of a copyrighted computer software program from a business friend radier than spendit^ $500 to obtain his own program from the software dealer." Business scored 2.92; students scored 4.27 . Thirtyseven percent of business said "never," nine percent of students said "never." Many in the business world condemned the practice as stealing and/or illegal. A
256
fohnA. Wood etal.
number of interesting comments were given. "Software dealers cannot survive if everyone follows this example" (consequences, but may come from postconventional moral reasoning). "I believe a lot of software is grossly overpriced, especially for small business and the industry should try to correct this." (recognizes that a problem exists but doesn't use it as a jusdfication to act on one's own interests -:- change should come through the proper channels). "But if St Peter is rejecting apphcations for heaven on this basis, there must be a terrible slump in new housing construction there" (Everybody does it, so its ok). "It depends on whether the program is needed or not" (but, who would go to the trouble to copy a program they do not need?). "My conscience says no; my wallet says yes" (conflict of values). Students had less qualms about copying programs. "It is similar to recording a friend's album on one of your cassette tapes" (one practice justifies another). "You should take advantage of a friend who will help you and hope diey come to you if they need something" (Stage Two). "The friend has a right to use his software in any way he pleases since he has purchased the software and it belongs to him" (absolute right of ownership; rules don't apply).
Implications for the future It appears that these cases confirm the worst fears cited earlier by Reeck and by the authors oi Hahits of the Hahits ofthe Heart. Egoism and individualism are deeply ingrained in die psyche of the current business student populadon. A substantial number are willing to resort to any means to achieve their interests. Many others cannot reason beyond Kohlberg's "law and order" stage (4), indicating a serious lack of awareness ofj or commitment to, fundamental moral principles. Furdiermore, these cases are particularly intriguing in the light of the recent downfall of the Wall Street mogul, Ivan Boesky. Boesky seemed to embody the attitudes of many of the current crop of students. In a 1985 speech at the University of Califomia he said: "Greed is all right, by the way. I want you to know that I think greed is healthy. You can be greedy and still feel good about yourself." '* In a Newsweek article, historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. seeks to examine the Boesky event in the Ught of
historical trends. Schlesinger is not the first to discern periodic cycles of excess in business followed by a time of reform and idealism." It usually takes some distancing to recognize the trend, but Schlesinger feels that the time is ripe for reform. Chronic scandals in the defense industry, PAC money infiuence in Washington, Michael Deaver and other infiuence peddlers in the capitoi, and the new rash of spies who turned traitor for cold cash, point to serious moral problems in business.'* But this event, Schlesinger and some others beheve, signals an end of an era and a beginning of a wave of ideahsm and political activism. Richard West Dean of New York University's business school, observes: "There has been a real reaction to the greedy Yuppie image, and of course this only adds to i t . . [Current students] are beginning to realize they may have to eam it the old-fashioned way. And I get the sense that doesn't bother them. I think now diey are going to be more patient about making the big money." " We hope that Schlesinger is correct in his forecast But has the wave of student egoism peaked? Will the single Boesky scandal have this great an impact? Are not other attending factors needed to support and sustain such a significant change in attitude? Will the deeply embedded strains of egoism and individualism thwart any significant movement in the other direction? Will the scandal on Wall Street only drive tmderground the more overt expressions of selfishness? These questions cannot be answered with any certainty at the present time. Our survey indicates that many students are presendy riding the crest of greed and egoism. A change in this would be most welcome.
Notes ' Darrell Reeck, Ethics for the Professions (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982), p. 160. ^ /i»J.,p. 161. ' / i i i , p. 32. * Robert Bellah et al, Hahits ofthe Heart (New York: Harper and Row, 1986), p. vii. 5 iiiV/.,p.28. * 7ii
