Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow's Business Leaders

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY EDUCATING TOMORROW’S BUSINESS LEADERS MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR INTEGRIT...

Author: Charles Wankel | Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

317 downloads 2804 Views 1MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY EDUCATING TOMORROW’S BUSINESS LEADERS

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR INTEGRITY: ETHICALLY EDUCATING TOMORROW’S BUSINESS LEADERS

EDITED BY

CHARLES WANKEL St. John’s University, New York, USA

AGATA STACHOWICZ-STANUSCH Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

United Kingdom – North America – Japan India – Malaysia – China

Emerald Group Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2011 Copyright r 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited Reprints and permission service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. No responsibility is accepted for the accuracy of information contained in the text, illustrations or advertisements. The opinions expressed in these chapters are not necessarily those of the Editor or the publisher. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Howard House, Environmental Management System has been certified by ISOQAR to ISO 14001:2004 standards Awarded in recognition of Emerald’s production department’s adherence to quality systems and processes when preparing scholarly journals for print

Contents

List of Contributors

vii

List of Reviewers

ix

Acknowledgements

xi PART I: INTRODUCTION

1.

Management Education for Integrity; Transcending Amoral Business Curricula Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

3

PART II: BUSINESS ETHICS EDUCATION: ACROSS THE CURRICULUM AND BEYOND 2.

3.

4.

5.

Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics Education in Management Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

15

Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity Joseph A. Petrick

49

Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement in Business Ethics Courses Louis C. Gasper

73

Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An Analysis of Academic Administrators’ Perceptions at Spanish Business Schools Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez, J. Alberto Arago´n-Correa and Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres

89

vi

Contents PART III: VALUES AS PATHWAYS TO ETHICAL ACTION

6.

7.

8.

Teaching ‘‘How’’ — Not ‘‘Whether’’ — to Manage with Integrity: Undergraduate and MBA Applications of the ‘‘Giving Voice to Values’’ Curriculum Christopher P. Adkins, Mary C. Gentile, Cynthia Ingols and Sˇpela Trefalt

107

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity Tony Simons, Kevin Basik and Hannes Leroy

135

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool to Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese Perspective Heh Jason Huang

155

PART IV: DEVELOPING CURRICULA BASED ON A LIBERAL APPROACH TO EDUCATION: A WAY TOWARD RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS 9.

10.

11.

Returning to a Holistic Management Education and the Tradition of Liberal Education Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

171

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts Sarah Stookey

193

Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model and Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience Bradley R. Agle, Jeffery A. Thompson, David W. Hart, Lori L. Wadsworth and Aaron Miller

217

About the Authors

243

Author Index

251

Subject Index

261

List of Contributors

Christopher P. Adkins

Mason School of Business, The College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA

Bradley R. Agle

Marriott School of Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Alison L. Antes

Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, KY, USA

J. Alberto Arago´n-Correa

University of Granada, Granada, Spain; University of California, Berkeley, USA

Kevin Basik

US Air Force Academy, Center for Character & Leadership, CO, USA

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez

University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Louis C. Gasper

University of Dallas, Irving, TX, USA

Mary C. Gentile

Babson College, Babson Park, MA, USA

Lindsey Godwin

Champlain College, Burlington, VT, USA

David W. Hart

George W. Romney Institute of Public Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Heh Jason Huang

National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres

University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Cynthia Ingols

Simmons School of Management, Boston, MA, USA

Hannes Leroy

Catholic University Of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

viii

List of Contributors

Aaron Miller

George W. Romney Institute of Public Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Mary Grace Neville

Southwestern University, Georgetown, TX, USA

Joseph A. Petrick

Wright State University, Raj Soin College Of Business, Dayton, OH, USA

Tony Simons

Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze, Poland

Sarah Stookey

Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, CT, USA

Jeffery A. Thompson

George W. Romney Institute of Public Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Sˇpela Trefalt

Simmons School of Management, Boston MA, USA

Lori L. Wadsworth

George W. Romney Institute of Public Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Charles Wankel

St. John’s University, New York, USA

Ethan P. Waples

University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, OK, USA

List of Reviewers

Tom Burgess

Leeds University Business School, Leeds, UK

Timothy S. Clark

Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA

Gregory J. Cooper

Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA

Roger A. Dean

Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA

Gil Fairholm

Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA

Matt Fairholm

The University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA

Jay Finkelman

Marshall Goldsmith School of Management, CA, USA

Peter T. Gianiodis

Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA

Michael G. Goldsby

Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA

Dennis Heaton

Maharishi University of Management, Fairﬁeld, IA, USA

Jo Ann Ho

Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia

Louise Kelly

Alliant International University in San Diego, CA, USA

George W. Kester

Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA, USA

Peggy Sue Loroz

Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA

Daniel E. Martin

California State University, Long Beach, CA, USA

Patric Onsando

Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya

Molly Pepper

Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA

Mark Pruett

University of South Carolina Upstate, Spartanburg, SC, USA

Hussain Rammal

University of South Australia, South Australia, Australia

Carolyn Roper

Purdue University North Central, Westville, IN, USA

Ravi Subramaniam

University of Madras, India

Acknowledgements

We extend our sincere thanks to all the chapter authors for their hard work on this book. They met the deadlines, engaged the ideas, responded to feedback, and wrote magniﬁcent chapters that made this book stellar. We are equally appreciative to all chapter reviewers for adding constructive and thoughtful suggestions to the text. We would like to thank Kyle Miller and Neil Washington, Charles Wankel’s research associates, who have been very skillful and supportive in moving the book through into publication. To them, and to all others who helped us, many thanks. We especially want to acknowledge Mary Miskin, the Development Editor at Emerald Group Publishing Limited for her support and goodwill and everyone else on Emerald’s editorial and production team. On a personal note, we thank our families for providing us with their warmth throughout the book development process. Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

PART I INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1

Management Education for Integrity; Transcending Amoral Business Curricula Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Abstract Business ethics in higher education is burgeoning as a topic of interest spurred by emerging accreditation requirements and the increasing interest of businesses to recruit people with ethical ﬁber. The effects of avaricious, ethically bereft leadership have sparked a burgeoning interest in reorienting the business education system toward producing managers with integrity. Although it might seem like common sense, educating managers for integrity as a priority has eluded us in the past. Management Education For Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders explores ways through which the moral character of our business leaders might be improved with a mind to reining in the myopic perspectives that business schools have foisted on them, and that they have been lavishly rewarded for using in the past. New directions, such as promoting spiritual values within business contexts, using moral conundrums from literature to illustrate ethical issues to students, and developing curricula based on a liberal approach to education are already emerging as centerpieces of some business school programs. There is no dearth of ethical challenges for business educators and emerging managers to take on. By incorporating these important new changes into business education, management educators can move to equipping the moral, ecological, and economic heroes of our future. People who do not believe that management is an activity requiring at its best extraordinary intellect and intelligence, marked physical powers in terms of energy, stamina, and strength, and durable moral qualities like courage, integrity, determination, and ability to choose right over wrong should read no further, for nothing in the pages to come will make sense to them. All others are welcome. (Andrews, 1971: xv)

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

4

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Why is it important and advisable to conduct scholarly studies of bolstering integrity in business through management education? And, why is now the appropriate time to do so? Recently we have witnessed a surge of interest in discourse on responsible management education as a sine qua non of responsibility in the business world (Christensen, Peirce, Hartman, Hoffman, & Carrier, 2007; Crane & Matten, 2004; Lane & Bogue, 2010; Matten & Moon, 2004; Miller, 2009; Moon & Shen, 2010; Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009; Swanson & Fisher, 2008). This movement in management education occurred partly in reaction to highly publicized corporate scandals and instances of management misconduct that have eroded public faith (such as TEPCO, Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Adelphia, and Arthur Andersen), and fueled legislative reactions such as the Sarbanes–Oxley Act in the United States (see Brown & Trevin˜o, 2006; Economist, 2011; Fair Disclosure Wire, 2011; Puffer & McCarthy, 2008; Waldman & Galvin, 2008). Concomitantly, management scholars and educators (see Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Mintzberg, 2004; Pfeffer, 2005; Wankel & DeFillippi, 2002; Wankel & DeFillippi, 2006) have begun to question the assumptions underlying traditional management education, which in their view have not only contributed to a recent moral crisis but also failed to prepare students and executives for coping with the responsible leadership challenges and ethical dilemmas that face managers in contemporary corporations (Ghoshal, 2005). The last decade had abundant corporate, national, and international ethical and ﬁnancial scandals and crises. This has resulted in what might be called an epoch of moral catastrophes. For management education, this sets the stage for more effectively performing its mission. That is, discover truth, develop knowledge, and educate citizens who will make this world a better place. It has created a need to bolster the ethical acumen of managers through business education imperatives. It is incumbent on business schools not only to imbue students with a deep practical understanding of globalization, innovation, and the tools of the functional areas, but also to develop their ability and inclination to think and act wisely and morally. We realize that integrity without knowledge is ineffectual, while knowledge unbounded by integrity is dangerous. Also, the need for reﬂection on integrity in management education results from important social pressure. After this epoch of catastrophes, society expects on the one hand that business educators will contribute to addressing business ethics problems by preparing a cohort of students who will raise the ethical standards of the business world (Kurpis, Beqiri, & Helgeson, 2008). On the other hand, corporate business practice has motivated business schools and organizations to take a more critical look at their role in the ethical development of students and employees. The public generally perceives corporate business as lacking strong professional ethics. Business leaders recognize that such a pejorative view of business can be detrimental (Schmidt, McAdams, & Foster, 2009). Swanson (2004) has shown that public trust in business has dropped to unfortunate lows, with CEOs and stockbrokers being trusted by only 23% of the public, just a tad above their assessment of used car dealers, at 15%. Today’s university students will be tomorrow’s business managers. As such, they will have a profound impact on both everyday practice and the principles governing business (Sauers, Kennedy, & Loo, 2005). Fully agreeing with the statement that ‘‘ethical behavior favors a prepared mind,’’ we considered it necessary to invite world-class

Management Education for Integrity

5

scientists with a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives to share their observations and experience concerning the issue of integrity in management education. In the chapters that follow, the authors suggest directions that business educators might take to reorient higher education in business to transcend merely equipping people and organizations to greedily proceed in building wealth without a moral compass. This quest for integrity in business and education is focused not on microlevel wrongdoing, but rather on the larger ediﬁce of global business that has proven a context within which ethics might be disregarded (Wankel & Malleck, 2011). Certainly, the economic pratfalls of the last decade suggest that the ﬁnancial helmsmen should be more attentive and concerned with the repercussions of their machinations (e.g., Berger, Cunningham, & Drumwright, 2007; Dobos, Barry, & Pogge, 2011; Koslowski, 2011; Maak & Pless, 2006; Rodriguez, Siegel, Hillman, & Eden, 2006; Spitzek, Dierksmeier, & Pirson, 2011; Sun, Stewart, & Pollard, 2010). Stakeholders expect that corporations and their leaders will take more active roles as agents of change on the global stage, and assist in the ﬁght against some of the most pressing problems in the world, such as poverty, environmental degradation, human rights violations, corruption, and pandemic diseases (Dao, Langella, & Carbo, 2011; Epstein & Widener, 2011; Hansen, Sextl, & Reichwald, 2010; Huang, 2010; Mainardes, Alves, & Raposo, 2011; Pless, Maak, & Stahl, in press; Waters, 2011). Although it is generally acknowledged that integrity ‘‘is at the heart of what effective business and education is all about,’’ executives seem ill-prepared to cope effectively with the challenges of leading with integrity in a global stakeholder environment. Relatively little is known about how management education can prepare managers and professionals for those challenges (Wankel & StachowiczStanusch, in press). This was another reason that induced us to take up the challenge of scholarly discourse on the best practices of teaching integrity to future managers. We also found inspiration in a new perspective on business management and management education. The economic crisis along with cultural and technological trends in the global business environment became a catalyst for the development of a new person-centered perspective on business education. This perspective is based on positive psychology, where proﬁt needs to be grounded in human ﬂourishing (Gregg & Stoner, 2008), spiritual aspects of individuals, and a fascination of scholarly management with the human brain and intelligence. It is obvious that management education cannot remain indifferent to this perspective. With these motivations in mind, we have designed this book to achieve the following goals: 1. to provide empirically grounded, theoretical insights for rethinking business curricula requisite for understanding and meaningfully confronting the challenges of the second decade of the twenty-ﬁrst century; 2. to explain how curricula should be streamlined and rejuvenated in order to ensure a high level of integrity in management education; 3. to offer examples of new tools, teaching methods, integrity sensitization and development exercises, and ethical management education assessment approaches;

6

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

4. to provide teaching tools and curricula for a new way of implementing ethics education, based on human fulﬁllment and development of man’s virtuous nature; 5. to present a holistic approach involving developing integrity in future managers through an integration of extracurricular and curricular elements. We have organized these goals under three themes, each of which contains multiple chapter contributions. Part II, ‘‘Business Ethics Education: Across the Curriculum and Beyond,’’ opens with Ethan Waples and Alison Antes’ chapter, ‘‘Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics Education in Management.’’ They provide a framework of sensemaking (Mumford et al., 2008) of ethical decision making that might be adapted to address ethics education in business. This paradigm is accompanied by documented and replicated success in enhancing ethical decision making across a wide variety of disciplines, including the sciences and engineering (Barraquier, 2011; Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008; Narayanan, Zane, & Kemmerer, 2011). Moreover, the chapter authors provide theoretical justiﬁcation for why this particular framework is relevant to management ethics and outline how it could be applied to design instruction. Also, they interpret the ﬁndings of two recent meta-analyses vis-a`-vis the sensemaking approach and present ‘‘best practice’’ recommendations designing instructional programs to enhance integrity in management education. Finally, the authors provide a brief review and discussion of appropriate assessment methods to serve as a refresher for those interested in the pedagogy of business ethics. These methods, while geared toward validating individual business ethics instructional programs, are also discussed with an eye toward meeting and exceeding the Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools’ (AACSB) Assurance of Learning (AOL) standards. The authors close with ﬁnal thoughts and future directions for ethics education utilizing a sensemaking approach. Joseph Petrick in his conceptual and applied pedagogy chapter entitled ‘‘Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity’’ brieﬂy treats the concept of integrity capacity as a management competency and strategic asset and then reports on three time-tested pedagogical resources for advancing management integrity capacity: the Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), the Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), and the Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE). Each of these pedagogical tools advances management integrity capacity in distinctive ways both inside and outside the classroom. If integrity capacity is a critical intangible asset of individuals and organizations and if managers are held accountable for responsibly managing that intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is important for responsible management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE — three proven pedagogical tools delineated in this chapter that enhance managerial integrity capacity. In the next chapter, ‘‘Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement in Business Ethics Courses,’’ Louis Gasper argues that the continuing egregious ethical lapses in the business world despite decades of instruction in ethics by business schools must be due to a failure of students to internalize what has been taught. He says that the usual course structures, using only textbooks of theory and cases for application, do not engage the students’ moral imagination. If moral imagination is

Management Education for Integrity

7

an important component of ethical ‘‘internalization,’’ then it may be worthwhile to use imaginative materials in business courses. The chapter author describes his own experience in teaching ethics from imaginative literature and gives an example of his method by synopsizing one of the stories he uses and explaining how ethical principles are illustrated by it. Gasper notes that the instructor must have not only some grounding in moral philosophy but also a fair acquaintance with imaginative literature, both to have insight into the stories and to discover new sources of material. Citing the success of his course, he urges that instructors in business ethics give serious consideration to using this method. Part II is closed by chapter ‘‘Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An Analysis of Academic Administrators’ Perceptions at Spanish Business Schools,’’ written by Blanca Delgado-Ma´rquez, J. Alberto Arago´n-Correa, and Nuria Esther Hurtado-Torres. Recent corporate scandals have led to a growing realization that integrity and business are very closely connected. This realization is leading employers to demand that business schools, as providers of education and training to managers and senior executives, train their students in ethics and social responsibility. However, the central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the importance of management students acquiring abilities related to integrity, which can be used in the subsequent lives as managers, it is crucial to specify ways to integrate such abilities into management education. To achieve this aim, the chapter is divided into three main sections. The ﬁrst section contains a brief theoretical review about the models proposed in the literature aimed at fostering the implementation of higher levels of integrity into management education. In the second section, the authors explore how these ideas may be conducted at business schools to promote future integrity-based behaviors in management students, and they review the most recent empirical literature about integrity in management education. In the third section, they perform an empirical analysis of the perceptions of Spanish business school administrators. The third part, ‘‘Values as Pathways to Ethical Action,’’ opens with the chapter ‘‘Teaching ‘How’ — not ‘Whether’ — to Manage with Integrity: Undergraduate and MBA Applications of the ‘Giving Voice to Values’ Curriculum,’’ written by Christopher P. Adkins, Mary Gentile, Cynthia Ingols, and Sˇpela Trefalt, which provides many valuable suggestions for undergraduate and MBA applications of this curriculum. In this chapter, the authors outline the rationale behind the ‘‘Giving Voice to Values’’ curriculum and a pedagogical approach in an introductory section, and then provide case examples of its application for undergraduate business students at the College of William and Mary and MBA students at Simmons School of Management. Rather than assuming that students need to somehow be ‘‘ﬁxed’’ or taught to ‘‘have’’ integrity, the GVV approach focuses on providing them with the skills and the tools and the actual practice in how to behave with integrity, therefore making that choice more feasible and more likely. At William and Mary, this has meant building from students’ past experiences of voicing their values, teaching them the skills of empathic stakeholder analysis, and crafting ‘‘self-stories of action’’ so students can personalize their responses to real-world situations that are relevant for both for current and future experiences. These initiatives utilize the GVV curriculum

8

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

and reﬂect some of the latest research ﬁndings about motivation and action. At Simmons, GVV has proven a powerful tool for addressing the long-standing challenges of integrating values and ethics across the MBA curriculum in a way that non-ethics faculty and students ﬁnd compelling, and for assessing MBA students’ knowledge of how to apply the GVV methodology in difﬁcult situations. Tony Simons, Kevin Basik, and Hannes Leroy discuss changing ethical dimensions of behavior through developing awareness, new skills, and habits. In their chapter, ‘‘Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity,’’ they argue that a successful change effort must: (a) Motivate change. Avoidance motives might help in the initial unfreezing process. However, they also inhibit learning, so approach motives should be emphasized. (b) Equip. Many promises are broken because the actor was not thoughtful enough in making the promise or did not track and manage his or her commitments. Fuzzy communication often results in the perception of broken promises — which is, in practice, as bad as the real thing. Learners must become aware of internal mechanisms that might undermine their follow-through and how others see them. (c) Follow up. To create any lasting change, one must put in place a system that maintains accountability for the change effort, remind learners what they are trying to do and why, provide troubleshooting and exercises targeted at the learner’s speciﬁc areas of difﬁculty, and provide emotional support for the struggle. (d) Provide a context. Senior management must demonstrate support through action — namely, by providing adequate resources for the change effort and by endeavoring to clean up their own house. If all four of the above-mentioned elements are in place, then efforts to raise integrity levels are very likely to succeed and to yield positive outcomes both for the organization and for the individuals in it. Heh Jason Huang concludes Part III of our book with his original insights on using scenario-based approach as a teaching tool to promote integrity awareness from a Chinese perspective. This chapter, ‘‘Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool to Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese Perspective,’’ begins with the notion that differences in what constitutes integrity may be explained by differences in national culture. In China, although Confucians think highly about being honest and being consistent between words and deeds, they maintain that people should not be conﬁned by those norms if it is a right thing to break them and that great men are those who stick to principle of righteousness. This line of thought may be understood by the Confucians’ Doctrine of the Mean. The doctrine conforms with the Taoist philosophical tradition, which is grounded in a mutuality of differences in nature (yin and yang). This philosophy holds that a leader must understand the movement and constant dynamics of these two opposing but complementary forces to maintain harmony in life. Some Western scholars also share the thought that leader integrity deﬁes simple categorization and its meaning is highly context-speciﬁc. The important issues of integrity are seen to begin to surface only after being raised to the level of group discussion. This author shows how groups of MBA and EMBA students in

Management Education for Integrity

9

Taiwan interactively learned the integrity issues associated with their decisions. By maintaining careful consistency among thought, voice, and action, management educators can better align teaching with the need to foster the development of managers with integrity. The last part of our book, ‘‘Developing Curricula based on a Liberal Approach to Education: A Way toward Responsible Citizens,’’ opens with Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin’s thought-provoking call for ‘‘Returning to a Holistic Management Education and the Tradition of Liberal Education.’’ From the Latin integritatem, integrity means ‘‘wholeness’’ and requires a willingness to see the world as a collective whole rather than as an optimized set of competitive parts. Unfortunately, the majority of management education today perpetuates a siloed view of knowledge, which truncates attention on developing the humanistic dimensions critical for ethical behavior. Thus, this chapter advances the growing call from scholars who contend that management education needs to incorporate a whole-systems philosophy if we are to facilitate students’ ability to act with integrity in an increasingly fragmented world. Speciﬁcally, the authors offer a model for conceptualizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical tradition of liberal education. They begin with a deﬁnition of ‘‘liberal’’ education, followed by a brief discussion of the history of undergraduate education, highlighting the increasing call for a return to a more integrated model. Then, the chapter authors brieﬂy highlight the cognitive, ethical, and psychological development characteristics of the traditional undergraduate population that should be considered when redesigning their curriculum. Next, they summarize the three-year action research process that informed their emerging model. Finally, they posit a model of liberal undergraduate business education that considers a variety of elements — both inside the classroom and beyond — aimed at transforming students into conscientious global citizens. They conclude with a discussion of the challenges and tensions inherent as we shift our current approach to management education. In ‘‘Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts,’’ Sarah Stookey elaborates on education for a meaningful ethics based on appreciation of broad social, political, economic, and cultural interdependencies. She argues that these qualities can be encouraged by the kind of broadly intellectual and interdisciplinary focus more frequently associated with the liberal arts. The ﬁrst part of the chapter summarizes a history of educational practice and social divisions through which preparation for business is highly stratiﬁed. Business elites traditionally have had the beneﬁts of liberal arts education, often with limited formal education in business. Conversely, nonelites in the business world tend to lack the beneﬁts of liberal arts education and have an excess of overly instrumental business education. Still, they are more likely than their liberal arts counterparts to have wide-ranging practical business experience. The second half of the chapter describes seven key elements of a liberal arts approach to management education that can foster integrity, and it is illustrated with examples of teaching practices. Stookey concludes that our educational system mirrors a society segregated by elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege. For business to serve other than short-term and minority interests, we need a different educational system.

10

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Bradley Agle, Jeffery Thompson, David Hart, Lori Wadsworth, and Aaron Miller close our book with ‘‘Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model and Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience.’’ The authors take a holistic approach to the development of integrity in business schools. They begin by examining the various objectives of business ethics education through an examination of the ethics development model used in the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. Then the chapter authors provide examples of the various types of pedagogical approaches discussed in the business ethics literature for each of these objectives, along with examples of successful pedagogical techniques used in Marriott School ethics courses. They conclude by discussing the Marriott School agenda for fuller fulﬁllment of its ethics mission. Such an agenda includes utilizing all the elements of a student’s collegiate experience to enhance his or her ethical development, per the ethics development model. Business ethics in higher education is burgeoning as a topic of interest spurred by emerging accreditation requirements and the increasing interest of businesses to recruit people with ethical ﬁber. The effects of myopic, greedy, ethically bereft leadership have sparked a burgeoning interest in reorienting the business education system toward producing managers with integrity. Although it might seem like common sense, educating managers for integrity as a priority has eluded us in the past. This book explores ways through which the moral character of our business leaders might be improved with a mind to reining in the myopic perspectives that business schools have foisted on them, and that they have been lavishly rewarded for using in the past. New directions, such as spiritual values, are already emerging as centerpieces of some business school programs. There is no dearth of ethical challenges for business educators and emerging managers to take on. We hope that business education will move to equipping moral, ecological, and economic heroes of our future.

References Andrews, K. R. (1971). The concept of corporate strategy. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin. Barraquier, A. (2011). Ethical behaviour in practice: Decision outcomes and strategic implications. British Journal of Management, 22(1), S28–S46. Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2007). Mainstreaming corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 49, 132–157. Brown, M. E., & Trevin˜o, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616. Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L., Hoffman, W. M., & Carrier, J. (2007). Ethics, CSR, and sustainability in the Financial Times top 50 global business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 73, 347–368. Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Questioning the domain of business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 357–369. Dao, V., Langella, I., & Carbo, J. (2011). From green to sustainability: Information technology and an integrated sustainability framework. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 20(1), 63–79.

Management Education for Integrity

11

Dobos, N., Barry, C., & Pogge, T. W. M. (Eds). (2011). Global ﬁnancial crisis: The ethical issues. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Economist. (2011). Piecing together Fukushima: Japan’s nuclear disaster. The Economist, May 5. Accessed from ABI/Inform database. Epstein, M. J., & Widener, S. K. (2011). Facilitating sustainable development decisions: Measuring stakeholder reactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(2), 107–123. Fair Disclosure Wire. (2011). The alliance for nuclear accountability holds a news event on a report on department of energy programs — Final. Fair Disclosure Wire, April 4. Accessed from ABI/Inform database. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91. Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266–277. Gregg, S., & Stoner, J. R., Jr. (Eds). (2008). Rethinking business management: Examining the foundations of business education. Princeton: Witherspoon Institute. Hansen, E. G., Sextl, M., & Reichwald, R. (2010). Managing strategic alliances through a community-enabled balanced scorecard: The case of Merck Ltd, Thailand. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(6), 387–399. Huang, C. J. (2010). Corporate governance, corporate social responsibility and corporate performance. Journal of Management & Organization, 16(5), 641–655. Kligyte, V., Marcy, R. T., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., Godfrey, E. S., Mumford, M. D., & Hougen, D. F. (2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to responsible conduct of research training in the physical sciences and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 251–278. Koslowski, P. (2011). The ethics of banking: Conclusions from the ﬁnancial crisis. Berlin: Springer. Kurpis, L. V., Beqiri, M. S., & Helgeson, J. G. (2008). The effects of commitment to moral selfimprovement and religiosity on ethics of business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 447–463. Lane, I. F., & Bogue, E. G. (2010). Faculty perspectives regarding the importance and place of nontechnical competencies in veterinary medical education at ﬁve North American colleges of veterinary medicine. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 237(1), 53–64. Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society: A relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 99–115. Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2011). Stakeholder theory: Issues to resolve. Management Decision, 49(2), 226–252. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2004). Corporate social responsibility education in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 323–337. Miller, R. A. (2009). The ethics narrative and the role of the business school in moral development. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 287–293. Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of management and management development. San Francisco: Beret-Koehler Publishers. Moon, J., & Shen, X. (2010). CSR in China research: Salience, focus and nature. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 613–629. Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., y Devenport, L. D. (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior, 18, 315–339.

12

Charles Wankel and Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch

Narayanan, V. K., Zane, L. J., & Kemmerer, B. (2011). The cognitive perspective in strategy: An integrative review. Journal of Management, 37(1), 305–351. Nicholson, C. Y., & DeMoss, M. (2009). Teaching ethics and social responsibility: An evaluation of undergraduate business education at the discipline level. Journal of Education for Business, 84(4), 213–218. Pfeffer, J. (2005). Why do bad management theories persist? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 96–100. Pless, N., Maak, T., & Stahl, G. (2011). Developing responsible global leaders through international service learning programs: The Ulysses experience. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 237–260. Retrieved from http://journals.aomonline.org/ InPress/main.asp?action=preview&art_id=833&p_id=2&p_short=AMLE Puffer, S. M., & McCarthy, D. J. (2008). Ethical turnarounds and transformational leadership: A global imperative for CSR. Thunderbird International Business Review, 50, 303–314. Rodriguez, P., Siegel, D. S., Hillman, A., & Eden, L. (2006). Three lenses on the multinational enterprise: Politics, corruption, and corporate social responsibility. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 733–746. Sauers, D. A., Kennedy, J. C., & Loo, J. (2005). Power distance and individualism as cultural determinants of ethical judgments. Journal of International Business Research, 4(1), 81–96. Schmidt, C. D., McAdams, C. R., & Foster, V. (2009). Promoting the moral reasoning of undergraduate business students through a deliberate psychological education-based classroom intervention. Journal of Moral Education, 38(3), 315–334. Spitzek, H., Dierksmeier, C., & Pirson, M. (Eds). (2011). Banking with integrity: The winners of the ﬁnancial crisis? New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Sun, W., Stewart, J., & Pollard, D. (Eds). (2010). Reframing corporate social responsibility: Lessons from the global ﬁnancial crisis. Bingley, UK: Emerald. Swanson, D. L. (2004). The buck stops here: Why universities must reclaim business ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(1), 43–61. Swanson, D. L., & Fisher, D. G. (Eds). (2008). Advancing business ethics education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Waldman, D. A., & Galvin, B. M. (2008). Alternative perspectives of responsible leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 37, 327–341. Wankel, C., & DeFillippi, R. (2002). Rethinking management education for the 21st century. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Wankel, C., & DeFillippi, R. (2006). New visions of graduate management education. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds). (2011). Globalization: Ethical models and applications. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Wankel, C., & Stachowicz-Stanusch, A. (in press). Principles for responsible management education: A pathway to management education for integrity. Organization and Management. Waters, R. D. (2011). Redeﬁning stewardship: Examining how Fortune 100 organizations use stewardship with virtual stakeholders. Public Relations Review, 37(2), 129–136.

PART II BUSINESS ETHICS EDUCATION: ACROSS THE CURRICULUM AND BEYOND

Chapter 2

Sensemaking: A Fresh Framework for Ethics Education in Management Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Abstract Purpose — The purpose of this chapter is to discuss a new approach to ethics education in management, the sensemaking approach, and how this approach matches with several key design, approach, and content features identiﬁed in successful ethics education programs (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). In addition, we brieﬂy discuss the role and importance of assessment of ethics programs, particularly with respect to the sensemaking approach. Methodology — The methodology employed is conceptual review and discussion. Findings — We suggest that the sensemaking approach is a valid framework for enhancing the ethical decision making of management students and that the approach has features that indicate its potential to be effective in this area. We also suggest that with this new approach, innovative methods of assessment may be undertaken to target speciﬁc behavioral and cognitive outcomes key to learning. Limitations — Our work is limited, in part, because the sensemaking framework has yet to be translated into a business environment. However, implications and future directions regarding translation are discussed. Originality/value — For educators, we offer a new perspective on building ethics education, one that focuses on altering the process of sensemaking within an ethical dilemma. We see such courses or modules as being applied both outside and within the core business curriculum, thus strengthening management students’ ethical skills throughout their collegiate experiences.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

16

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Prominent cases of ethical misconduct spanning the gamut of organizations, from corporate, government, and military to academic, reveal the seriousness of professional misbehavior and raise concern among scholars and the public alike about ethical behavior in organizations. No matter the organization or details of the latest account of misconduct, one factor — leadership — remains constant across scenarios. Whether organizational leaders perpetrate misbehavior or foster an environment permitting unethical conduct, scholars are left asking how to remedy what appears to be a deﬁcit of ethical leadership in organizations. Ethics education has become the most commonly proposed solution for promoting ethics across professions and, in particular, for promoting business ethics among students who will join the leadership ranks in the corporate world. Although scholars generally agree that ethics education is a fruitful endeavor, the approaches to educating for ethics vary widely. Indeed, the number of scholars, across a wide variety of disciplines, publishing on ‘‘business ethics’’ alone has exploded in the past decade — virtually tripling from the 1990s to the late 2000s (Tenbrunsel & Smith-Crowe, 2008). Much of this literature has been on ethical education of students in business and management (Baetz & Sharp, 2004; Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Glenn, 1992; Koehn, 2005; Mintz, 1996; PainterMorland, Fontrodona, Hoffman, & Rowe, 2003; Ritter, 2006; Sims & Felton, 2006; Weber, 2007). This inﬂux of literature brought forth two qualitative reviews of business ethics (O’Fallon & Butterﬁeld, 2005; Trevin˜o, Weaver, & Reynolds, 2006) and also a quantitative review of business ethics education (Waples, Antes, Murphy, Connelly, & Mumford, 2009). In spite of this abundance of literature, several key, unresolved issues concerning ethics education for management students remain. The primary unresolved issue concerns a lack, even among this plethora of literature, of research and theory clearly addressing the pedagogy behind business ethics curriculum. Indeed, a meta-analysis conducted by Waples et al. (2009) identiﬁed only 25 examinations of business ethics instructional programs with well-deﬁned, carefully constructed, and meticulously measured evaluation criteria related to ethics (e.g., awareness, decision making). This problem is germane not only to business. The scientiﬁc community also struggles to identify sound evaluations of ethics courses and arrive at an understanding of effective ethics education pedagogy (cf., Antes et al., 2009). Perhaps the most essential criterion in business ethics — ethical decision making — has been the focus of many models (Ferrell & Gresham, 1985; Hunt & Vitell, 1986; Jones, 1991; Sonenshein, 2007; Trevin˜o, 1986) and empirical investigations, as reviewed by Loe, Ferrell, and Mansﬁeld (2000). Despite the recognition of the importance of ethical decision making in the business ethics literature, relatively few researchers have examined programs aimed at increasing the ethical decision making of individuals, within either business schools or organizations. We suggest, in the wake of the global ﬁnancial crisis of 2008–2010, the major automobile recalls of Toyota in 2010, and the massive Gulf Coast oil spill of 2010, the time has come to take a more direct, pragmatic approach to business ethics education. To address this, we have three goals for the present chapter. First, we provide a sensemaking framework (Mumford et al., 2008), which brings with it documented and replicated success in enhancing ethical decision making, that can be adopted to approach ethics education in business. Second, we propose instructional

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

17

design techniques for delivering sensemaking instruction based on best practice recommendations emerging from recent meta-analyses (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009) that examined ethics instruction in the sciences and business, respectively. Third, and ﬁnally, we provide a brief review and discussion of appropriate assessment methods that might be applied to assess the recommended instructional approach to serve as a refresher for those interested in the pedagogy of business ethics. These methods, while geared toward validating individual business ethics instructional programs, will also be discussed with an eye toward meeting and exceeding the Association to Advance Collegiate Business Schools’ (AACSB) Assurance of Learning (AOL) standards.

2.1. Sensemaking as a Framework for Ethics Instruction Central to a discussion concerning effective approaches to ethics education must be an examination of the ethical framework applied as the basis for instruction. Different ethical frameworks make their own assumptions about the nature of ethics and thus shape ethics instruction in a particular manner. For instance, a framework based on deontological and teleological moral systems might encourage students to make two kinds of evaluations of potential alternatives for resolving an ethical problem — a deontological evaluation of norms and rules of moral behavior and a teleological evaluation of likely consequences for each alternative (Hunt & Vitell, 2006). Another framework emphasizes developing students’ knowledge of philosophical ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, ethical egoism, the categorical imperative, and virtue ethics, which are believed to provide a basis for understanding the ethical components of a particular issue (Sims, 2002). One of the most commonly applied frameworks is cognitive moral development theory (Kohlberg, 1969, 1976; Rest, 1979, 1986) that proposes people are capable of less selﬁsh, more principled moral reasoning as they move to higher stages of moral development. Therefore, instruction based on a moral development framework aims to advance students to higher stages of moral development. As evidenced by these example frameworks, each offers a unique perspective on ethics and results in a unique basis for ethics instruction. Recently, a sensemaking framework has been proposed for understanding ethical behavior in complex professional roles (Mumford et al., 2008), and this framework appears to be a plausible basis for ethics instruction for management students. The central tenet of this ethical framework is that ethical behavior arises from decision making in response to complex workplace problems. Thus, the emphasis of instruction based on this framework becomes developing an individual’s capacity to conceptualize and work through ethical problems to arrive at a plausible decision and action. Given the complex, social nature of management in organizations and the sensemaking framework’s emphasis on understanding the entirety of a situation, possible consequences, and consideration of others, this framework provides an ideal alternative framework for ethics instruction for management students.

18

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

2.1.1.

Theoretical Model of Sensemaking

Before considering the application of the sensemaking framework to management ethics instruction, we ﬁrst discuss the framework’s theoretical basis and evidence for the validity of the model. The sensemaking model (illustrated in Figure 2.1) accounts for personal and professional frames of reference that one brings with him/her to the workplace that play a role in the interpretation and processing of workplace events and problems. For example, an individual has personal values, goals, and prior personal experiences that shape his/her interpretations of workplace events (Harris, 1994; Sheldon & Kasser, 1998). On the side of occupational considerations, professional experience, including learned norms of one’s given profession or domain of expertise, guidelines, and principles, operates to shape his/her interpretation of, and reaction to, workplace events and, in particular, ethical problems (Ericsson & Smith, 1991). At its core, the model emphasizes that as an individual interacts with his/her surroundings, he/she applies a mental model — or mental representation (JohnsonLaird, 1983) — to make sense of, or understand, one’s work and events taking place in the workplace. Of central importance to ethical decision making, this mental model permits one to recognize the ethical dimensions of one’s work role and organizational problems. It is when one recognizes, or frames, a situation as involving ethical aspects and begins to perceive the potential causes of the situation that the central processes of ethical decision making — forecasting, emotion management, and self-reﬂection — permit one to make sense of, and act on, his/her surroundings. As one critically evaluates the situation, framing processes continue to operate and shape an individual’s analysis. For instance, as an employee weighs his/her manager’s request to record a few sales transactions prior to their actual occurrence to pad monthly

Figure 2.1: Sensemaking model of ethical decision making (Mumford et al., 2008). Reused with permission.

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

19

revenues, the ﬁrst frame of reference operating may be professional. As such, the individual considers, from the professional perspective, standards, rules, or guidelines that may make this practice unethical. Simultaneously, similar thoughts about the consequences of insubordination — regardless of the morality of behaviors — begin to add complexity to the analysis of the situation. After recognition of an ethical problem, an individual begins to forecast potential outcomes for key stakeholders (Hogarth & Makridakis, 1981). Recognition of the ethical dimensions of a workplace problem, and forecasting a range of potential outcomes, evokes emotion, typically negative emotions such as anxiety, anger, or fear (Gaudine & Thorne, 2001; Haidt, 2001). Thus, the regulation, or management, of an emotional reaction proves essential to making an ethical choice (Gross, 1999). As an individual considers potential outcomes of various courses of action, or even inaction, self-reﬂection on elements of one’s personal and professional frames of reference, such as goals and experiences, serves to provide knowledge to inform continued framing of the situation, forecasting, and emotion regulation (Habermas & Bluck, 2000; Oyserman & Markus, 1990). These cognitive processes permit the application of an initial mental model for understanding workplace ethics, and the product of these processes is a reﬁned mental model indicating ideal decisions and actions for addressing the workplace problem (Mumford, Friedrich, Caughron, & Byrne, 2007). Of central importance to the viability of this model for instruction is that the model implies metacognitive reasoning strategies that facilitate the execution of these sensemaking processes. These strategies require purposeful, active analysis of workplace events. These metacognitive reasoning strategies (described in Table 2.1) include recognizing circumstances, seeking help, questioning one’s judgment, managing emotions, anticipating consequences, analyzing personal motivations, and considering others. Not only do the strategies provide for reﬂective and active analysis of ethical decisions, but they also reﬂect the substantive processes involved in ethical decision making. As such, they provide the focal point of the sensemaking framework as a pedagogical tool and act as practical, concrete learning outcomes for assessing the enhancement of ethical decision making. Importantly, the utilization of the sensemaking framework as an instructional tool is also supported by a solid foundation of research. This research (summarized in Table 2.2) provides evidence for the validity of the framework by demonstrating the effectiveness of instructional programs based on the framework, the operation of individual-level and situational variables consistent with hypotheses arising from the model, and the relationship of the central processes to ethical decision making.

2.1.2.

The Sensemaking Framework for Business Ethics Instruction

Turning to the application of the sensemaking framework for ethics education for management students, it is important to remember the fundamental objective of ethics instruction according to this framework — to develop a mental model of ethics

20

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Table 2.1: Metacognitive reasoning strategies. Strategy

Description

1 Recognizing circumstances

Thinking about, and awareness of, origins of the problem(s), individuals involved, and relevant principles, goals, and values 2 Seeking help Consulting a mentor, supervisor, peer, or institutional resource; learning from others’ behaviors in similar situations 3 Questioning one’s Considering that one’s interpretation of the problem(s) and judgment potential decisions may be biased or based on faulty assumptions and recognizing the problems that people often have with making ethical decisions 4 Managing emotions Awareness of one’s emotions, their effects on thinking and decision making, and regulating emotional reactions to the problem(s) 5 Anticipating Thinking about many possible outcomes, such as consequences consequences for others and both short- and long-term outcomes of possible decision alternatives 6 Analyzing personal Considering one’s deeply rooted motivations, values, and motivations goals and how they might affect one’s decision making 7 Considering others Being mindful of others’ perceptions, perspectives, and concerns, and the likely impact of one’s actions on others socially and professionally

Note: Adapted from Mumford et al. (2008).

and ethical decision making in one’s work that allows one to recognize the ethical dimensions of workplace situations and work through those problems by critical analysis. This objective requires that ethics instruction for managers includes several components. First, it is critical to examine and decompose existing misconceptions about ethics and ethical behavior that prevent the formation of a mental model for understanding ethics in organizations and in leadership. Next, students must learn about the complexities of decision making and become aware of the value of a strategic, critical thinking approach to addressing the decision-making demands of one’s leadership role. Finally, students should be presented with decision-making tools (i.e., metacognitive reasoning strategies) that facilitate the execution of sensemaking processes central to ethical decision making.

2.1.2.1. Breaking down misconceptions The ﬁrst component of applying this framework, addressing misconceptions, is critical as it serves as a foundation for the remaining components of instruction. Three common, and related, misconceptions

Research purpose

Design complex, scenario-based ethical decision-making (EDM) measures, including measures of underlying metacognitive reasoning strategies, and provide evidence for their validity

Examine whether personality characteristics (i.e., the Big Five, narcissism, and cynicism) are related to EDM, including metacognitive reasoning strategies

Examine the relationship of environmental workplace variables,

Study

Mumford et al. (2006)

Antes et al. (2007)

Mumford, Murphy, et al. (2007)

Newcomers to graduate research laboratories completed measures of

Doctoral students in the sciences completed measures of personality and EDM

Doctoral students in the sciences completed EDM measures, along with measures of hypothesized causes and outcomes of EDM

Method

Table 2.2: Summary of research evidence for the sensemaking model.

EDM was related to hypothesized causes (e.g., intelligence) and outcomes (e.g., judgments of ethical misconduct) as expected; scores for metacognitive strategies were positively related to EDM scores (r ranging from .20 to .52) Personality variables related to selfperception (i.e., narcissism) and perceptions of others (i.e., cynicism) were negatively related to ethical decisions and metacognitive reasoning strategies (b coefﬁcients ranging from –.16 to –.35) Working in an environment characterized by

Findings

Working in a negative environment hindered decision making, likely

Findings provide evidence that one’s understanding of, and framing of, oneself and others is related to one’s application of sensemaking strategies and EDM

Provides evidence that the proposed underlying metacognitive strategies implied by the sensemaking framework are related to scores on EDM

Validity implications for sensemaking framework

Sensemaking and Management Ethics 21

Assess whether Kligyte et al.’s (2008) instruction affects the mental models of individuals and determine if effects hold over time

Examine the inﬂuence of Mumford et al.’s (2008) sensemaking instruction adapted for training participants in a different ﬁeld of study

Examine the inﬂuence of sensemaking instruction — a twoday, interactive case-

Kligyte et al. (2008)

Mumford et al. (2008)

such as interpersonal conﬂict and lack of rewards, to EDM

Research purpose

Brock et al. (2008)

Study

Table 2.2: (Continued )

Compared, 6 months after instruction, mental models of graduate students who had completed the instructional program to students and faculty who had not Members of a physical sciences/engineering research center completed a ﬁeldspeciﬁc measure of EDM prior to, and following, the instructional intervention Graduate students in the sciences completed a ﬁeld-speciﬁc measure of EDM prior to, and following, the

environmental dimensions and EDM

Method factors such as interpersonal conﬂict was negatively related to EDM (b coefﬁcients ranging from –.22 to –.35) Students of the instructional program had more sophisticated mental models of ethical problems than their untrained counterparts and faculty Moderate to large increases (Cohen’s d .53–1.82) in EDM and four of seven metacognitive reasoning strategies (Cohen’s d .33–1.92); positive subjective participant reactions Moderate to large increases (Cohen’s d .49–1.46) in EDM and metacognitive reasoning strategy

Findings

Evidence for the effectiveness of the sensemaking approach for enhancing the

Replicated ﬁndings from Mumford et al. (2008) indicating the effectiveness of the sensemaking instruction

Sensemaking instruction appears to change mental models of those instructed

due to a disruption of mental model formation at a key stage in one’s career

Validity implications for sensemaking framework

22 Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Examine the inﬂuence of the frequency of direct exposure to unethical practices on the EDM of developing professionals, taking

Mumford, Waples et al. (2009)

Mumford, Connelly, et al. (2009)

Investigate the effect of negative emotions (anger and fear) and the management of those emotions (i.e., through distraction, relaxation, and cognitive reappraisal) on EDM Examine whether EDM differs by professional ﬁeld and experience in that ﬁeld due to differing socialization mechanisms

Kligyte et al. (2009)

based seminar — on EDM

Doctoral science students in early and later stages of their graduate programs completed measures of the frequency of

Participants were asked to complete EDM measures after anger or fear was manipulated and participants engaged in one of the three emotion management techniques Doctoral students in the sciences were compared for differences in EDM, metacognitive reasoning strategies, and social-behavioral patterns in responding to ethical problems

instructional intervention

Social and biological sciences scored higher with regard to EDM, with this difference linked to the reasoning strategies and social responses underlying decision making, even after controlling for individual differences and differential exposure to unethical practices Exposure to unethical events in one’s workplace was negatively related to EDM (b coefﬁcients ranging from –.15

application (Cohen’s d .45–1.36); positive subjective participant reactions Individuals experiencing anger made less ethical choices than those experiencing fear; cognitive reappraisal and relaxation techniques minimized the effect of anger

Findings consistent with framework ‘s proposition that experience provides a mechanism for forming a mental

Differences in EDM processes across ﬁeld and experience level provides evidence that ﬁeld norms do inform EDM processes

Provides evidence for the role of emotions and emotion management in EDM

EDM skills of students instructed

Sensemaking and Management Ethics 23

Examine the relationship between creative thinking skills and EDM

Examine whether forecasting contributes to EDM

Stenmark et al. (2010)

into account years of experience, perceptions of acceptability of unethical practices, and perceptions of ethical climate

Research purpose

Mumford et al. (2010)

Study

Table 2.2: (Continued )

Participants were asked to solve ethical problems after being prompted to forecast possible outcomes of the situation

Doctoral students in the sciences completed measures of creative thinking skills (e.g., problem deﬁnition and idea generation) along with measures of EDM

exposure to unethical workplace practices, perceptions of acceptability of unethical practices, climate, and EDM

Method to –.33) with the relationship being stronger among less experienced students; frequency of exposure to unethical events was related to perceiving those events as acceptable Creative thinking skills were related to EDM and metacognitive strategies (b coefﬁcients ranging from .14 to .35); intelligence, a control variable, was also related to EDM (b coefﬁcients ranging from .14 to .30) Individuals who identiﬁed key causes and the most critical consequences of a problem made more ethical decisions than those who did not

Findings

Provides evidence for the importance of forecasting in making ethical decisions

Findings provide evidence that EDM is a complex, cognitive task requiring general cognitive ability and involving processes such as recognition of the problem and generation of multiple alternatives

model for understanding professional conduct

Validity implications for sensemaking framework

24 Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Investigate the inﬂuence of self-reﬂection on EDM

Investigate whether afﬁrming one’s ethical values (i.e., ‘‘moral credentialing’’) produces the paradoxical effect of facilitating unethical behavior while taking into account how easy (or difﬁcult) it was to rationalize the unethical behavior

Antes et al. (2011)

Brown et al. (2011)

Experimental study asked participants to engage in moral credentialing prior to being exposed to a situation where they could cheat on a task; the task was manipulated so that it would be easy or difﬁcult to rationalize the cheating behavior

Participants were asked to reﬂect on past experiences relevant to a current ethical problem they were tasked with addressing

Individuals who reﬂected on past instances of situations that they considered positive applied material from that experience to solving the new problem, resulting in more ethical choices Participants who credentialed themselves were more likely to cheat on the task, but only when the cheating could be easily rationalized Provides evidence for the effects of framing of oneself and the situation on EDM

Provides evidence for self-reﬂection mechanisms and the role of past experiences in EDM

Sensemaking and Management Ethics 25

26

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

include assumptions about the straightforward nature of ethics and ethical decision making in organizations and the protective nature of one’s moral virtue (Bazerman & Moore, 2009). First, students must recognize the complexity of ethics in organizations and, moreover, the complexity of making ethical decisions. Individuals are likely to fall prey to the availability bias (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973) and call to mind relatively extreme cases of unethical conduct in the corporate world, such as where harmful or faulty products were knowingly sold to consumers or cases of ﬁnancial fraud, because of their salience and prevalence in business ethics texts. This activation of extreme scenarios when conceptualizing business ethics creates the notion that ethical problems encountered by managers in the corporate world are fairly obvious. Extrapolating from this deduction, management students may also assume that ethical decision making, given the black-and-white nature of the issues, is straightforward. Of course, ethical behavior and ethical decision making in organizations is much more complex than this misconception allows one to recognize. Thus, instruction must discuss the vast range and nature of the ethical problems encountered by managers and the ‘‘gray areas’’ often inherent in them. In fact, by the very nature of the work, because managers make decisions that directly inﬂuence other individuals, nearly every decision a manager makes involves an ethical dimension (Messick & Bazerman, 2001). Indeed, organizational leaders shape the ethical climate within their organization and serve as role models for ethical behavior (Brown & Trevin˜o, 2006), clearly a dimension of their role that involves ethical considerations on a daily basis. Overall, instruction must encourage students to expand their conception of the nature and type of ethical problems encountered in their role to include ethical considerations in such tasks as fairness in assigning work tasks, expectations for employees, and managing interpersonal conﬂict. When ethical leadership is construed in this manner, the list of potential ethical considerations is nearly endless. To name a few, leaders encounter issues of favoritism, sharing information with employees at the appropriate time, fairness in hiring, ﬁring, allocation of rewards and promotions, honesty in reports, and fairness in giving credit for work. Leaders also encounter concerns with regard to conﬂicts of interest, handling diversity and managing discrimination, appropriate training and development of employees, providing employees with voice and participation in decision making, informing others of rationale behind decisions and policies, anticipating unintended consequences of decisions or policies, and providing fair and regular feedback. This list is far from exhaustive and does not even cover relationships that leaders have outside of the organization, such as relationships with customers, suppliers, and, more broadly, the public in general. 2.1.2.2. Self-enhancement bias Another key misconception that must be addressed at the outset of instruction is the faulty assumption, stemming from natural selfenhancement mechanisms (John & Robins, 1994), that one’s moral values are sufﬁcient to protect one from, or make one ‘‘immune’’ to, unethical behavior. In this regard, students must learn that the complexity of ethical decision making in

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

27

organizations, given situational factors and the natural faultiness of human judgment and decision making, allows personal values to be beneﬁcial, but not sufﬁcient, to protect against unethical choices. This faulty assumption is particularly detrimental to sensemaking because it implies that one need not think, rather ethical choices will be obvious. Moreover, this assumption relates to a misconception that when others engage in unethical behavior, it must be a function of their immoral nature. Rather, students must learn that it is often poor decision making that contributes to unethical behavior, even among well-intentioned individuals. This lesson is important for managers who may be faced in their career with managing the misbehavior of others, an issue that involves its own ethical considerations. Once students recognize the complexity of ethical issues and the critical importance of ethical decision making, they are prepared to learn about this form of decision making. To begin, a simple primer, or review, of the inherently ﬂawed nature of human judgment and decision making fosters a sense of buy-in with regard to the importance of the topic and student readiness to learn (Baldwin, Magjuka, & Loher, 1991). In this component of the instruction, students can be reminded of their existing biases that were already covered, including the assumption that they are immune to unethical behavior and ethical decision making is straightforward. An instructor might present other examples of the ﬂawed nature of judgment and decision making by demonstrating other biases, such as hindsight or ease of recall biases, bounded rationality, escalation of commitment, motivational and emotion inﬂuences, or the powerful inﬂuence of framing effects, which lead people to make choices that are otherwise irrational (Bazerman & Moore, 2009). 2.1.2.3. Rules, guidelines, and ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards As students explore the range and nature of ethical issues they might encounter in their roles, it is also important to cover two additional elements of ethical decision making. First, the rules and principles that might provide insight into the types and nature of ethical problems should be discussed and brieﬂy explored. Typically rules and principles vary by industry or organization, with common codes available in ﬁelds such as marketing, accounting, and management. Second, it is also necessary for students to consider the range and nature of the consequences of how they handle these issues. The list is rather lengthy, including factors at the individual, dyadic, or group level — such as trust, effectiveness of teamwork, workplace stress, interpersonal conﬂict, perceptions of fairness, and commitment — to the organization level, such as absenteeism, turnover, proﬁt, and public image (Brown & Trevin˜o, 2006; Cullen, Parboteeah, & Victor, 2003). Overall, management students must come to understand that ethics is an integral component of their leadership role. 2.1.2.4. Core of ethical decision making To this point, the intent of these instructional recommendations is to prepare students to learn about ethical decision-making tools to facilitate their sensemaking. These preliminary phases are critical and should not be overlooked. In the ﬁnal component of an application of this framework to ethics instruction, students are presented with a guide for

28

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

understanding ethical decision making and tools for executing the psychological processes central to ethical decision making. First, to provide students with a framework for understanding the elements operating on and around their ethical decision making, a simpliﬁed ﬁve-component model might be presented (see Figure 2.2). This model provides a simpler, condensed representation of the role that professional guidelines play in providing some foundation for ethical decision making. Next, the model speciﬁes the operation of constraints on ethical decision making, including situational constraints, such as time pressure and group conﬂict, and personal constraints, such as self-enhancement, fear of failure, and close-mindedness, that limit student’s decision-making capacity by detrimentally inﬂuencing his/her interpretation of the situation and application of rules, guidelines, and decision-making strategies. These constraints should be explored and students made aware of the importance of ongoing scanning for these elements that might impinge on one’s decision making. In fact, these constraints may serve as a gauge of the ethical climate within one’s work unit or organization (Martin & Cullen, 2006; Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2008). Next, the ﬁve-component model presents the importance of decision-making strategies (i.e., metacognitive reasoning strategies) to serve as tools for how to systematically approach thinking through an ethical problem to reach a decision. The remainder of the instruction then focuses on learning and practicing these strategies. This can be accomplished by deﬁning each of the strategies and providing explanation of why they prove valuable for ethical decision making. For instance, the strategy ‘‘considering others’’ can be presented as essential to leader ethical decision making. Leaders must understand that the process of perspective taking is of the utmost importance, particularly when interacting with peers and subordinates. This type of discussion would highlight the fact that the consideration of alternative viewpoints regarding an ethical situation may shed valuable light on the potential decisions and

Figure 2.2: Five-component model of ethical decision making (Mumford, Connelly, et al., 2007)

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

29

actions of the leader. Additionally, concerning the importance of procedural and interactional justice in the relationships formed by leaders and subordinates, acknowledging and integrating other’s perspectives during the cognitive processes of decision making are imperative in terms of predicting how others might react to a leader’s decisions in such situations. Next, presenting students with realistic problems that are complex and ambiguous will allow them to practice the application of these strategies, and will provide them with clear feedback about the value of utilizing these strategies to help them work through a problem. Moreover, students will ﬁnd that these strategies are especially valuable because they can be applied across a broad range of situations. The ﬁve-component model indicates that rules and guidelines, constraints, and decision-making strategies all feed an individual’s interpretation of the situation and the formulation of decisions, which ultimately yields action. Students may beneﬁt from drawing a contrast between decisions as an abstract entity existing in one’s mind and action, the deliberate enactment of a decision. As the emphasis of this model indicates the importance of analysis of one’s surroundings and of a systematic approach to decision making, the model implies reﬂection on, and learning from, the result of the process. Thus, although the model presents the process in a linear, stepwise fashion, it is of course not this straightforward. In summary, the strength of this approach to ethics instruction comes from shaping a new understanding of what constitutes ethics in the work of a manager. The approach is reﬂective and holistic in nature. Students reﬂect on their conception of ethics and ethical decision making, the assumptions they make about themselves and their surroundings, and the complexity of their role and how it is embedded in, and inﬂuences, the overall ethical complexion of followers and an organization. The approach also provides a means to recognize that ethical problems exist within a context of dynamic environmental elements. We now turn from these propositions regarding the value of a sensemaking approach for business ethics education to more concrete, speciﬁc considerations for implementation of such an approach in business schools.

2.1.3.

Implementing the Sensemaking Framework to Meet Management Education Needs

Our discussion above outlined the sensemaking approach, including its theoretical foundation, evidence for its validity, and potential application to instructing management students in ethical decision making. At this juncture, before a discussion of the implementation of this framework, we must address a broader fundamental question — does this framework offer a viable solution for meeting the needs of management education? To consider the answer to this question, we turn to the major curriculum domains offered by the AACSB in the 2004 report of the Ethics Education Task Force (EETF) to the AACSB Board of Directors (Phillips, 2004). These four domains, or ‘‘themes that y inform ethics education’’ (Phillips, 2004: 10), include (1) responsibility of business in society, (2) ethical decision making, (3) ethical leadership, and (4) corporate governance.

30

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

These four themes are deliberately arranged. Students begin with an introduction to acquire general knowledge of the ethical responsibilities of a business operating in society. Following this introduction, students should investigate and discover their own experiences and processes for making ethical decisions and leading others in the business environment. Finally, the ‘‘capstone’’ of knowledge is to understand, at the macro level, the functions of various levels of the business system that serve to regulate and monitor responsible behavior of both the individual and the ﬁrm. In this educational process, students must acquire the knowledge and skill necessary to reﬂect on and address questions such as — Is my business meeting its responsibility to society? Am I making ethical decisions regarding employees, customers, products, and services? Am I leading my employees in an ethical fashion? When providing curriculum capable of meeting these needs for ethical education, multiple criteria may be considered to measure whether ethics education is actually impactful (e.g., awareness, perceptions, moral reasoning). In the business ethics literature, there are numerous approaches to instruction following theories such as Rest (1986), Ferrell and Gresham (1985), Trevin˜o (1986), and Jones (1991); consult Tenbrunsel and Smith-Crowe (2008) for a comprehensive review. This existing work can be summarized by stating that a decision-making approach, or one that focuses on framing issues (Kavathatzopoulos, 1994), viewing issues from multiple perspectives (Ritter, 2006), and self-reﬂection (Sims & Brinkmann, 2003), seems to be the most useful for enhancing the outcomes for business ethics instruction (Waples et al., 2009). Thus, it is instructional programs based on ethical decision making, and the manner in which decision making occurs in terms of underlying social-cognitive processes, that most closely align with the key themes of ethics education. This approach goes beyond simple awareness or dissemination of knowledge alone; rather it provides an essential mode of thought for dealing with ethical problems. Ultimately, to meet the needs of ethics education implied by the ethics education themes and impact business ethics in a meaningful, lasting way, we must teach management students to think about how to navigate the complexities of ethics in the business environment. Students must be able to think about the consequences of their decisions and behavior for multiple stakeholders — coworkers, shareholders, and community — in complex, ambiguous situations that are always changing. These objectives are met by the sensemaking approach to ethics education that provides students with a new mental model (cf., Brock et al., 2008; Johnson-Laird, 1983) for ethical decision making and strategies to deal with both internal and external threats to an ethical outcome. Given our proposal regarding the applicability and likely success of the sensemaking approach for educating management students, we examine, in the remainder of this chapter, speciﬁc recommendations for implementing this approach in business schools. We do so by discussing how the structure and tenets of the sensemaking approach can be utilized to enact several best practice suggestions provided by meta-analytic reviews of the ethics education literature (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). We group these suggestions (summarized in Table 2.3) according to the key components of instructional development (Goldstein & Ford, 2002), including (1) initial design considerations, (2) general instructional approach, (3) learning content, and (4) instructional mediums (see Table 2.3 for summary).

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

31

Table 2.3: Instructional design recommendations for implementing the sensemaking approach. Instructional consideration Design Organizational support and standardization

Stand-alone with integration

Approach Case learning

Content Field-speciﬁc standards

Pitfalls and strategies in decision making

Application to sensemaking approach

References

Organizational support is necessary for the success of training interventions, particularly with respect to the transfer of behaviors. Must align with mission and goals of institution The sensemaking approach should be the ﬁrst stand-alone component of a broader, integrated business ethics curriculum

Weber (2006)

Cases in the sensemaking approach provide activities for the application of the metacognitive reasoning strategies that enhance ethical decision making. Understanding how to make sense of ethical situations requires exposure to events — often best achieved through the discussions of complex cases

Kolodner (1993), Mumford et al. (2008), and Riesbeck and Schank (1989)

Domain-speciﬁc knowledge is necessary to enhance the utility and effectiveness of the sensemaking approach; building expertise facilitates future problem-solving Learning and applying strategies, through understanding problems in decision making, facilitates the advancement from novice to expert in the mental model of ethical decisions

Baer (2003) and Ericsson (1999)

Antes et al. (2009) and Waples et al. (2009)

Brock et al. (2008)

32

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Table 2.3: (Continued ) Instructional consideration Mediums Integrated CMS

Social networking

Virtual SJTs

2.1.4.

Application to sensemaking approach

References

Interactive assignments increase immersion and interaction

McWilliams and Nahavandi (2006) Granitz and Koernig (2011)

Opportunities for real-time application of metacogntive strategies Enhanced ﬁdelity for sensemaking activities

Christian et al. (2010)

Initial Design Considerations

2.1.4.1. Organizational support and standardization The instructional design literature emphasizes the importance of organizational or social support as an antecedent for learning and transfer of training to the workplace — and thus the success of instructional programs (cf., Blume, Ford, Baldwin, & Huang, 2010). The same truth holds when considering the sensemaking approach to management education. As scholars have previously suggested, this likely begins with the mission statement of the institution (Procario-Foley & Bean, 2002). If the faculty of a university see the development of ethical students as part of their mission, then this culture is more likely to be ingrained and sustained among both students and faculty. Moreover, students who experience university support for an ethics curriculum will likely enter such a course with more positive attitudes and motivation to learn. Similarly, if the importance of ethics is stressed across a College of Business, then students will be provided with the opportunity to apply knowledge gained in a core business ethics course across all of their business courses, thus increasing both retention and transfer of knowledge (Blume et al., 2010; Oddo, 1997). An example of such a program can be found by examining Weber (2006). Organizational support — once achieved through aligning faculty and the students with the mission — is likely to promote some level of standardization. Of course, we do not suggest that every professor of business ethics teach a business ethics course in exactly the same manner. Rather, within institutions, it is important to come to relative agreement on the content, structure, and evaluation of a business ethics course. This level of standardization, at the very least, leads to outcomes that are more easily assessed and interpreted. Overall, standardization should lead to a level of learning and behavior that can be measured, and instructional programs that can be efﬁciently adapted when problems are detected. For management educators, the implications of this best practice are quite signiﬁcant. Although we value

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

33

academic freedom to teach topics the way we would like, it is perhaps more important for student learning in the arena of business ethics to join a united front, at least within our own institutions, as to how to carry out a common course or module regarding business ethics. It is here that the importance of the sensemaking approach can be seen. For example, individuals within an institution may or may not advocate Rest (1979), Kohlberg (1969), utilitarianism, or the categorical imperative. However, they should agree that if the institution is to achieve the mission of creating ethical managers, these students must be able to make appropriate decisions. The sensemaking approach provides this common ground by emphasizing the cognitive decision-making process as well as the social and environmental inﬂuences on this process.

2.1.4.2. Stand-alone with integration An often repeated debate and discussion (Baetz & Sharp, 2004; Lopez, Rechner, & Olson-Buchanan, 2005; Swanson & Fisher, 2011) involves whether business ethics instruction should be integrated into the curriculum for management students or set aside as its own course. Findings regarding the differences in effectiveness of stand-alone versus integrated courses are not drastically different (Waples et al., 2009). Thus, if we hope to strengthen individuals’ ability to make ethical decisions over time and across a variety of scenarios, ‘‘both’’ may be the answer to this debate. For individuals concerned with instructing management students in business ethics, this statement has a clear implication — while a stand-alone course may sufﬁce, it is necessary to also include some element of business ethics discussion or instruction within each business course. With regards to the aforementioned ﬁndings, we suggest that the sensemaking approach to ethics education provides a model for an initial, stand-alone instructional module or course. The design of the instruction with sensemaking is built around examining the process of decision making, biases in decision making, and strategies for alleviating decision-making errors and for enhancing the ethicality of decisions. This module should pique the interest of business educators for several reasons. First, the sensemaking instructional approach can be applied as a stand-alone component that stretches either part of a semester or a full semester. Indeed, it could be that such a module is offered prior to engaging in core business courses. This stand-alone component would provide a basis for individuals to begin to create their mental models for ethical decision making and apply this working model to an ethical dilemma. Second, if the institution adopted the sensemaking framework, and integrated it across courses, then the mental model students build in the initial course (regardless of length) is applied and reinforced throughout ethical discussions and case studies that are broached in each and every additional business course (e.g., accounting, economics, ﬁnance, management, and marketing). For example, the sensemaking process applied to ethical dilemmas in marketing is essentially the same when applied to dilemmas in management courses — what changes are the domain-speciﬁc applications of the sociocognitive principles of sensemaking. Thus, the sensemaking approach facilitates building ethical expertise by cross-domain application.

34

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

2.1.5.

Instructional Approach

2.1.5.1. Case learning Case-based reasoning (Kolodner, 1992, 1993) is a method of instruction that relies on the individual to draw from his/her own knowledge base in order to apply ‘‘case’’ knowledge to the current situation. Indeed, nearly every business school utilizes case libraries from famous business schools such as Harvard’s or Western Ontario’s Ivey School of Business. Kolodner’s theory suggests that individuals retrieve such cases from memory, match cases to current circumstances or adapt as needed to a new situation, apply case information, compare previous case solutions with current alternatives, readapt if solutions alternatives or potential outcomes are suboptimal, and then re-encode and store the case for future use (Kolodner, 1993; Kolodner & Simpson, 1989; Riesbeck & Schank, 1989). Thus, the case method proposes that individuals access their own library of cases that, subsequently, may come from their own unique experiences or experiences they have read about and adapted from other case studies. The sensemaking approach follows these same principles. Thus, in a business communications class, examples of the 2010 Gulf Coast oil spill and the messages delivered by BP would serve as an example for students to analyze the situation (e.g., What were the competing goals of the situation acting on various key players in the organization?) and consider the consequences of their actions (e.g., How will this decision impact shareholders? Customers? The public?). Their active analysis and engagement in the metacognitive reasoning strategies allows them to begin to recognize, and thus generate and forecast, potential problems in decision making. Moreover, the approach utilizes the case method to teach individuals to engage in information gathering and organization drawn from past experiences (i.e., case knowledge) to assist in interpreting their current circumstances (e.g., ethical dilemma). The recommendation here is relatively straightforward — the sensemaking approach beneﬁts from the utilization of cases to help management students bolster their own case library, in addition to providing them with a means for practicing application of metacognitive reasoning strategies.

2.1.6.

Learning Content

2.1.6.1. Inclusion of ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards In addition to utilizing a case-learning approach, other speciﬁc content of the instruction must be considered. The inclusion of ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards in ethics education appears to be one important recommendation (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). This statement ﬂows directly from our previous discussions. For example, integrating ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards into an ethical dilemma assumes that individuals have already built a mental model for ethical decision making (i.e., via a stand-alone course). Moreover, it assumes they are working to apply this model to decision making in different business contexts (i.e., integration). Hence, if we are to enhance ethical decision making, and the mental model that must be applied when encountering ethical decisions in business, we

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

35

must have a foundation that can be added to. This addition comes in the form of speciﬁc rules, guidelines, principles, and standards that a given ﬁeld may have (e.g., accounting). These ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards, when integrated into the already built mental model, serve to focus and enhance the probability that individuals will use multiple, and correct, perspectives when making sense of ethical problems. This notion is rooted in the premise of the role of expertise, particularly domain-speciﬁc expertise in effective problem solving (Ericsson, 1999). In general, ﬁeld-speciﬁc standards provide individuals with ways to identify causes and consequences in a situation that may facilitate them forming a response. The fundamental point to convey is that the sensemaking approach focuses on contextualization, which allows people a range of ﬂexibility in adapting standards to ﬁt with a particular ethical problem (Baer, 2003; Mumford et al., 2006). 2.1.6.2. Discussing pitfalls in and strategies for decision making The second content best practice achieved through using the sensemaking approach in management ethics education is the inclusion of a comprehensive generation and discussion of potential problems that may be encountered by an individual when he/ she works through an ethical dilemma. For example, it is important to remind students that they may have a tendency to rely on a single ﬁeld principle when considering potential actions, or avoid seeking outside help when it is necessary. One of the central activities in the sensemaking approach is to generate such problems by not only recognizing personal biases in decision making but also engaging in sensemaking strategies to avoid such biases. Providing and teaching strategies that students may apply in order to work through decision-making pitfalls en route to a solution to an ethical dilemma is an essential component of sensemaking. The metacognitive reasoning strategies associated with the sensemaking framework are listed in Table 2.1 and described in previous sections. Indeed, these strategies are a key ingredient to inculcating cognitive restructuring necessary to reshape an individual’s novice mental model of ethical decision making toward a more comprehensive expert model (Brock et al., 2008).

2.1.7.

Instructional Mediums

One of the most important considerations for management educators is to consider the next generation of management students. This next generation has often been described as the ‘‘millennials’’ (Deal, Altman, & Rogelberg, 2010), a group of young people who have drastically different methods and preferences for learning (Nicholas, 2008) — not to mention expectations and demands for the organizations that will employ them (Twenge, 2010). Regardless, this new generation has demanded a renaissance in teaching, such that the use of PowerPoint, Smart Boards, video clips, and interactive web assignments is almost demanded over traditional, bricks and mortar lecture education.

36

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Of course, following the trends noticed in the previous paragraph, the sensemaking approach is not best served by the typical lecture format. Indeed, some of the most innovative examples of ethics instruction — business or otherwise — are those that move away from lecture and provide immersive, relevant, and emotionally captivating material that draws students in, to not only understanding the principles but also internalizing and ﬁtting them to their own decision-making frameworks (cf., McWilliams & Nahavandi, 2006; Mumford et al., 2006; Simola, 2010). We propose that utilizing the sensemaking approach to instructing management students in ethical decision making provides a prime opportunity to utilize such immersive principles. 2.1.7.1. Integrated course management systems Course management systems (CMS) such as Blackboard are not new to the education market. However, recently developments such as CONNECT, by McGraw-Hill, have further enhanced the utility of CMS systems by adding web-based, customizable assignments that are automatically graded and integrated back into the CMS system. These additional features offer an abundance of possibilities for the sensemaking approach. For example, modules can be placed online, so that students may complete a survey regarding decision-making biases, be linked to a video explaining how such biases impact decision making, and then be immediately taken to an online chat where peerto-peer discussions of the implications of bias on ethical decisions in business may take place. Another learning activity linked to sensemaking may require students to watch a video demonstrating the context, characters, and problems involved in a workplace dilemma. Different students, or groups of students, might watch videos presenting different perspectives, for example, upper management, supervisors, low-level employees, and customers. Following these videos, students might journal individually, followed by online group chats about the video. Taking the discussion another step, the different groups might post a summary of the nature of the discussion to share with the remaining groups. It is this level of interaction and collaboration that is the core of the sensemaking approach — where facilitating perspective taking only enhances student’s ability to learn and practice such decisionmaking strategies. 2.1.7.2. Social networking sites Social networking tools, such as Facebook, Twitter, or blogs, provide a value opportunity for students to share their reactions to real-world events in real time (Granitz & Koernig, 2011). Students might be required to post examples of positive, ethical leadership that they experience at work, at school, or around their community. Social networking sites might also provide a means for ongoing social interaction and discussion about real-world ethical problems. For example, what better format to teach ‘‘seeking help’’ than for instructors to dedicate a Twitter or Facebook account or discussion to seeking the advice of others? Essentially, such outlets provide a forum for the use of the metacognitive reasoning strategies associated with sensemaking that remove the

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

37

barriers of space and time. In fact, these tools may facilitate greater interaction and depth of conversation about such topics. 2.1.7.3. Use virtual situational judgment tests One ﬁnal immersive format that may assist individuals employing the sensemaking approach to develop immersive activities is the situational judgment test (i.e., low-ﬁdelity simulation; Motowidlo, Dunnette, & Carter, 1990). Situational judgment tests are paper and pencil measures to assess constructs often targeted in personnel selection. Such tests provide a means to assess ethical decision making by providing students with complex, realistic scenarios (Mumford et al., 2006). As we follow trends in technology and research, it appears that an increasingly popular method in selection and assessment is the use of the video-based SJT (Chan & Schmitt, 1997; Weekly & Jones, 1997). Indeed, Christian, Edwards, and Bradley (2010) proposed that video-based SJTs would allow for greater predictive validity, in terms of performance, for tasks that were cognitive and relied on situational cues and contextual interpretations. In fact, evidence from their meta-analysis of SJTs found that video-based SJTs often led to higher relationships with job performance than their paper and pencil counterpart (Christian et al., 2010). Given the predictive validity of video-based SJTs in this context, and the effectiveness in sociocognitive judgment activities, we suggest it is an avenue for individuals employing the sensemaking approach to explore. The sensemaking process will likely be enhanced by using SJTs that are video-based through increasing the psychological ﬁdelity and enhancing the face validity of either assessments or activities of ethical decision making in business ethics education. While they may not replace cases as a primary mode of instruction, SJTs provide a format for engaging in similar activities in instructional environments that are not face-to-face. Certainly, such efforts are avenues for future exploration.

2.2. Sensemaking and Assessment As mentioned previously, the AACSB’s EETF report (Phillips, 2004) outlined adjusted guidelines to place a greater emphasis on ethics in the curriculum of business schools that are either accredited by or working for accreditation by AACSB. AACSB provides the university substantial freedom in determining how and where ethics is studied and assessed inside the curriculum. However, the importance of assessment with regards to both the AACSB’s AOL standards and the effectiveness of instruction cannot be understated. Given the recommendations we have made regarding using the sensemaking approach in ethics instruction for management students, and the key to assessment in both creating and maintaining an ethical culture through achieving the mission of the institution, we will brieﬂy examine some assessment considerations with particular attention to the sensemaking approach recommended. While the Phillips (2004) report does not specify particular instruments that must be used for assessment, we propose the application of a speciﬁc assessment framework in order to facilitate the accumulation of knowledge on the impact of

38

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

ethics instruction across a variety of criteria. Indeed, in the ﬁeld of business ethics instruction, one of the most troubling issues rests in a lack of appropriate assessment. For example, Waples et al. (2009) noted that although a large number of articles on business ethics education were obtained for potential inclusion in their meta-analysis, the majority were limited to the extent that they appropriately evaluated any outcome beyond reactions (e.g., whether individuals enjoyed the course or found it useful; Alliger, Tannenbaum, Bennett, Traver, & Shotland, 1997; Kirkpatrick, 1976). Similar concerns have been raised by other scholars (Caldwell, 2010; Loeb, 1991; Mumford et al., 2006; Swanson & Fisher, 2011). To alleviate such problems in the future, it is imperative that those who teach business ethics begin to evaluate their courses. Because we suggest a sensemaking approach for such instruction, we propose an assessment methodology to accompany it.

2.2.1.

What are We Assessing?

To evaluate courses appropriately, instructors need to consider the nature of the criteria. In this chapter, we argued for the use of ethical decision making as the appropriate outcome to measure for sensemaking-based instruction. We have done so on the basis of evidence presented and reviewed by a number of scholars. Although it is beyond the scope of this chapter to thoroughly review the entire training evaluation taxonomy presented by Alliger et al. (1997), we present brief descriptions of three components that are key for educators to consider. 2.2.1.1. Reactions Did you enjoy this course? Did you like the instructor? To any professor in any discipline, these sound like familiar questions. Indeed, many of us are evaluated based on the responses to such questions. These questions examining whether individuals like the course they participate in are often used to assess instruction (Alliger et al., 1997). Speciﬁcally, the dimensions of reactions are termed ‘‘affective reactions’’ or ‘‘utility judgments’’ (e.g., how useful participants feel the course will be to their job). However, if students enjoy a course or perceive it to be useful, does that mean that they have learned? Unfortunately, the results provided by Alliger et al. (1997) indicate that the answer is no. Thus, we suggest that when employing the sensemaking approach to ethics instruction (or any business ethics program), educators limit their use of the affective reaction measures to formative evaluations (Goldstein & Ford, 2002) and not consider them sufﬁcient for drawing conclusions about course effectiveness. Such measures will help to determine how to alter the course so that students respond more positively. However, these measures should not be substituted for or assumed to measure learning-oriented outcomes. 2.2.1.2. Learning The learning criterion discussed by Alliger et al. (1997) includes three distinct dimensions, each with potentially unique implications for use in sensemaking. First and foremost, it is absolutely necessary to assess the acquisition of knowledge (speciﬁcally, immediate knowledge). For any course in business ethics,

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

39

regardless of the focus or framework applied, such information is vital to determining the effectiveness of the instructional modules or course. Furthermore, immediate knowledge is the simplest assessment data to gather. Most often, such data are gathered at the end of a course or module. More difﬁcult to gather data are on knowledge retention and behavioral or skill demonstrations. Short-interval retention of learning could be gathered through coordinated efforts of departments within a business school. Unfortunately, such efforts may be viewed as intrusive, and therefore may not be well received by faculty. However, for assessing business ethics curriculum, knowledge retention data may be the most essential. Applied to the sensemaking framework, appropriate learning measures include assessments of whether the students are able to adequately recall the model presented. Additionally, can they recall the deﬁnitions of the metacognitive reasoning strategies, and the purpose each serves in the broader decision-making model? Can they recognize ﬁeld-speciﬁc rules and principles that guide behavior? Do they recall the ethics codes presented? Indeed, the list can continue. As these questions demonstrate, the framework applied for ethics instructions shapes the learning outcomes to be examined. Of course, the key to effective evaluation of learning is to develop both valid and reliable assessments based on the given framework. 2.2.1.3. Behavior The most elusive criterion of all is behavior, or transfer of training. Transfer occurs when actual behaviors, learned in training, are performed on the job. However, transfer data are difﬁcult to gather because these are data that must be gathered after some lapse of time, and in an environment that does not always lend itself to such efforts. When evaluation of distal behavioral outcomes is not feasible (often due to time and expense constraints), it is appropriate to examine more proximal transfer of learning, in the form of a work sample measure. Thus, we suggest that the behavior criterion (or measure of transfer of ethical decision making to on the job performance) be captured via a simulation exercise. With respect to the sensemaking approach, we must ask two key questions. Did students learn to apply the metacognitive reasoning strategies? In doing so, did they enhance their ethical decision making? It is of note that, from a sensemaking perspective, individuals solve ethical problems by applying their mental models. Hence, it is appropriate to utilize assessment methods permitting examination of performance on problem-solving exercises representing real-world work activities. Notably, previous ethics training programs following the sensemaking approach have had success in evaluating the questions posed above (Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008). However, the measures employed underwent an extensive validation process (Helton-Fauth et al., 2003; Mumford et al., 2006) beginning with the development of a taxonomy of ethical behaviors within the given ﬁelds of interest. In business, taxonomies on which to base such measures are relatively nonexistent (see Wooten, 2001, for an exception). Thus, to assess whether the sensemaking approach in business ethics is truly effective, decision scenarios, likely following the low-ﬁdelity simulation format, should be written. Such scenarios should serve three purposes: (1) reﬂect a range of both ethical and unethical potential actions, (2) employ decision options representing the use of metacognitive reasoning strategies, and (3) be resistant

40

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

to faking or socially desirable responding. Indeed, meeting such requirements is a difﬁcult task, especially when considering the statistical properties of forced choice measures (Christiansen, Burns, & Montgomery, 2005; LeBreton, Barksdale, Robin, & James, 2007). However, alternative methods also exist. If an appropriate measure is not able to be developed, we suggest the use of an assessment center, where problem solving represents a necessary dimension for effective performance (Arthur, Day, McNelly, & Edens, 2003). Of course, assessment centers use multiple activities to measure key aspects of job-relevant behavior or job-relevant constructs. For example, an in-basket approach could be utilized to determine transfer of ethical decision making. An in-basket inventory includes a variety of items that a manager would have to deal with in a truncated time frame. One or more of these issues could have ethical implications, requiring the individual to engage in ethical sensemaking and ultimately take an action that would be rated by assessors as ethical or unethical. In addition, assessors could capture the extent to which participants enacted metacognitive reasoning strategies (e.g., did they ask other participants for help; did they control their emotions) — yet another indication that ethical sensemaking is occurring. Of course, constructing assessment centers requires substantial time and effort. However, at least one example of an assessment center for undergraduate business students exists in the literature (Waldman & Korbar, 2004) and one for MBAs (Hoover, Giambatista, Sorenson, & Bommer, 2010). For three reasons, assessment centers provide a unique opportunity to evaluate business ethics instruction based on the sensemaking framework. First, they would provide a behaviorally based, real-world assessment of skill transfer. Second, they provide an innovative method to assess a wide variety of constructs — not just ethical decision making — most of which will and should be extracted from the educational mission of the college. And third, they combat criticisms that business schools are moving away from providing practical educations and focusing too much on scientiﬁc, research-oriented views of management (Bennis & O’Toole, 2005). The goal of assessment — to continuously improve on the educational experience by working to close the loop — can certainly be accomplished by traditional, paper and pencil measures of learning (i.e., ‘‘tests’’). In this section, we have argued that applying the sensemaking approach for instruction in management ethics does not prohibit such an accomplishment. Rather, we have suggested that beyond these measures, those interested in improving business ethics education should consider innovative, alternative methods of assessment focused on examining the extent of deep, meaningful learning and subsequently transfer of learning to observable, measurable behavior. To reiterate, implementation of such an effort may take the support of the entire college. Interestingly, such support will, in turn, serve to improve the ethics education received by the students.

2.3. Discussion 2.3.1.

Limitations

Prior to discussing several overarching implications from this chapter, it is necessary to point out two key limitations that one should bear in mind as one considers the

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

41

theoretical and practical utility of the sensemaking approach in concert with our suggestions for instructional design and assessment. First and foremost, our intent was not to provide a ‘‘review’’ chapter. Rather, we sought to discuss and provide recommendations pertaining to a speciﬁc aspect of the business ethics domain, ethical decision making. Therefore, it is possible, even likely, that a review of other aspects of the business ethics domain may provide equally viable and important conclusions to take into consideration as we seek to improve management ethics education. Moreover, our discussion was aimed primarily at management educators. While we would surmise that our conclusions and recommendations could be extrapolated to organizational ethics training, we would also caution the reader as organizational training operates in a different context and creates a variety of attitudes and motivations that may impact effectiveness. However, our focus has allowed us to point out several key considerations. First, our focus on decision making vis-a`-vis sensemaking appears to be warranted, as instructional efforts in this domain have successfully enhanced ethical decision making, revealing sizable effects that have held over time and across several disciplines (Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008). Furthermore, decision making leads to actions and behaviors. Hence, by educating management students on the proper methods for sensemaking in an ethical dilemma, we should ﬁnd management professionals engaging in substantially greater proportions of ethical behavior (a proposition that should be examined). The second limitation to note is that we relied on two recent meta-analyses to extract best practices, as they related to the sensemaking approach to management ethics education (Antes et al., 2009; Waples et al., 2009). Regardless, these metaanalyses were the most recent articles identifying programs with sound, empirical assessments of enhancements on ethical criteria. In addition, we also presented ample empirical evidence regarding the validity of the sensemaking framework in other disciplines, and sound normative arguments for how the sensemaking approach fulﬁlls the key attributes of ‘‘successful’’ ethics instruction programs. Despite the presentation of validity evidence accompanying our explanations of how the sensemaking approach matches the identiﬁed best practices, we understand that the propositions offered must undergo empirical examination. Our hope is that we have convinced some to engage in such studies while utilizing the sensemaking approach as their management ethics education framework.

2.3.2.

Implications and Future Directions

Despite these limitations, the present chapter offers three notable directions for educating tomorrow’s business leaders for integrity. These future directions include: (1) the introduction of a new framework for ethics education for managers, (2) an evaluation of how this sensemaking framework is guided by best practices emanating from the business ethics literature, and (3) comprehensive, innovative assessment

42

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

practices to provide clear, useful empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of ethics instruction in business schools. The sensemaking framework introduced is, of course, a template. It has proven successful in other disciplines (Kligyte et al., 2008; Mumford et al., 2008) and has been implemented at several institutions to varying degrees. However, this framework has not been fully adapted to business ethics. Perhaps the clearest future direction is to develop a taxonomy of ethical problems speciﬁc to the business disciplines, similar to efforts undertaken in the sciences (Helton-Fauth et al., 2003). Our intent is that individual business schools might use this sensemaking template as a ‘‘launch point’’ for ethics education. Furthermore, in line with the discussion regarding evaluation presented herein, another clear future direction is the development of assessment tools for evaluating instruction designed around the sensemaking and other decision-making frameworks. More speciﬁcally, we must begin to test whether the ‘‘best practices’’ we suggest be applied with the sensemaking framework hold to be valid in educating students in business ethics. Moving forward, clearly, management educators have a major endeavor on their hands. However, the potential positive outcomes of theoretically sound, welldesigned, standardized, effectively evaluated ethics education that is supported by colleges and universities must remain our central focus. Perhaps, one of our central considerations should also pertain to how, as a collective community, we can more effectively build, implement, and share a program of research to ﬁnally, once and for all, shed light on ethics education pedagogy.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank the reviewers of this chapter for their time and insights regarding improvements for our manuscript. We also thank Christopher Antes for his graphic design work. Lastly, we would like to acknowledge Dr. Michael D. Mumford for his important work in the area of ethics and mentorship throughout our careers. Both authors contributed equally to the present effort.

References Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W., Jr., Traver, H., & Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50, 341–358. Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2007). Personality and ethical decision making in research: The role of perceptions of self and others. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2, 15–34. Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 19, 379–402.

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

43

Antes, A. L., Thiel, C. E., Martin, L. E., Stenmark, C. K., Connelly, S., Devenport, L. D., & Mumford, M. D. (2011). Reﬂection on past experience as a source of knowledge to inform ethical decision making. (Manuscript submitted for publication). Arthur, W., Day, E. A., McNelly, T. L., & Edens, P. S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterionrelated validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125–153. Baer, J. (2003). Evaluative thinking, creativity, and task speciﬁcity: Separating wheat from chaff is not the same as ﬁnding needle in haystacks. In: M. A. Runco (Ed.), Critical creative processes (pp. 129–152). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton. Baetz, M., & Sharp, D. (2004). Integrating ethics content into the core business curriculum: Do core teaching materials do the job? Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 53–62. Baldwin, T. T., Magjuka, R. J., & Loher, B. T. (1991). The perils of participation: Effects of choice of training on trainee motivation and learning. Personnel Psychology, 44, 51–65. Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. A. (2009). Judgment in managerial decision making (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Bennis, W., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83, 96–106. Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A metaanalytic review. Journal of Management, 36, 1065–1105. Brock, M. E., Vert, A., Kligyte, V., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., & Mumford, M. D. (2008). An evaluation of sensemaking training using a think-aloud protocol. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 449–472. Brown, M. E., & Trevin˜o, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595–616. Brown, R. P., Tamborski, M., Wang, X., Barnes, C. D., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2011). Moral credentialing and the rationalization of misconduct. Ethics & Behavior, 21, 1–12. Caldwell, C. (2010). A ten-step model for academic integrity: A positive approach for business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 1–13. Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (1997). Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in situational judgment tests: Subgroup differences in test performance and face validity perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 143–159. Christian, M. S., Edwards, B. D., & Bradley, J. C. (2010). Situational judgment tests: Constructs assessed and a meta-analysis of their criterion-related validities. Personnel Psychology, 63, 83–117. Christiansen, N. D., Burns, G. N., & Montgomery, G. E. (2005). Reconsidering forced-choice item formats for applicant personality assessment. Human Performance, 18, 267–307. Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P., & Victor, B. (2003). The effects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 127–141. Deal, J. J., Altman, D. G., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2010). Millennials at work: What we know and what we need to do (if anything). Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 191–199. Ericsson, K. A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative and ﬂexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 329–361. Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision-making in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49, 8–96. Gaudine, A., & Thorne, L. (2001). Emotion and ethical decision-making in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 31, 175–187.

44

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266–277. Glenn, J. R. (1992). Can a business and society course affect the ethical judgment of future managers? Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 217–223. Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Granitz, N., & Koernig, S. K. (2011). Web 2.0 and marketing education: Explanations and experiential applications. Journal of Marketing Education, 33, 57–72. Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotional regulation: Past, present, future. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 551–573. Habermas, T., & Bluck, S. (2000). Getting a life: The emergence of the life story in adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 748–769. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834. Harris, S. G. (1994). Organizational culture and individual sensemaking: A schema-based perspective. Organization Science, 5, 309–321. Helton-Fauth, W., Gaddis, B., Scott, G., Mumford, M. D., Devenport, L., Connelly, S., & Brown, R. P. (2003). A new approach to assessing ethical conduct in scientiﬁc work. Accountability in Research: Policies & Quality Assurance, 10, 205–228. Hogarth, R. M., & Makridakis, S. (1981). Forecasting and planning: An evaluation. Management Science, 27, 115–138. Hoover, D., Giambatista, R. C., Sorenson, R. L., & Bommer, W. H. (2010). Assessing the effectiveness of whole person learning pedagogy in skill acquisition. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 192–203. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6, 5–16. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26, 143–153. John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206–219. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issuecontingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366–395. Kavathatzopoulos, I. (1994). Training professional managers in decision-making about real life business ethics problems: The acquisition of the autonomous problem-solving skill. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 379–386. Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1976). Evaluation of training. In: R. L. Craig (Ed.), Training and development handbook: A guide to human resource development (2nd ed., pp. 301–319). New York: McGraw-Hill. Kligyte, V., Connelly, S., Thiel, C. E., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., & Mumford, M. D. (2009, April). Inﬂuence of emotions and emotion regulation strategies on ethical decisionmaking. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA. Kligyte, V., Marcy, R. T., Waples, E. P., Sevier, S. T., Godfrey, E. S., Mumford, M. D., & Hougen, D. F. (2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to responsible conduct of research training in the physical sciences and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 251–278.

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

45

Koehn, D. (2005). Transforming our students: Teaching business ethics post-Enron. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15, 137–151. Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive development approach to socialization. In: D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally. Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In: T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues (pp. 31–53). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Kolodner, J. L. (1992). An introduction to case-based reasoning. Artiﬁcial Intelligence Review, 6, 3–34. Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman. Kolodner, J. L., & Simpson, R. L. (1989). The MEDIATOR: Analysis of an early case-based problem solver. Cognitive Science, 13, 507–549. LeBreton, J. M., Barksdale, C. D., Robin, J., & James, L. R. (2007). Measurement issues associated with conditional reasoning tests: Indirect measurement and test faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1–16. Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansﬁeld, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 185–204. Loeb, S. E. (1991). The evaluation of ‘‘outcomes’’ of accounting ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 77–84. Lopez, Y. P., Rechner, P. L., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2005). Shaping ethical perceptions: An empirical assessment of the inﬂuence of business education, culture, and demographic factors. Journal of Business Ethics, 60, 341–358. Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J. B. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 175–194. McWilliams, V., & Nahavandi, A. (2006). Using live cases to teach ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 421–433. Messick, D. M., & Bazerman, M. H. (2001). Ethical leadership and the psychology of decision making. Volume Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, 3, 213–238. Mintz, S. M. (1996). Aristotelian virtue and business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 827–838. Motowidlo, S. J., Dunnette, M. D., & Carter, G. W. (1990). An alternative selection procedure: The low-ﬁdelity simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 640–647. Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, J. F., & Locander, W. B. (2008). Effect of ethical climate on turnover intention: Linking attitudinal and stress theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 559–574. Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., & Devenport, L. D. (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics & Behavior, 18, 315–339. Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., & Waples, E. P. (2007). Responsible conduct of research training: Making sense of complex problems. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma. Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Murphy, S. T., Devenport, L. D., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., & Waples, E. P. (2009). Field and experience inﬂuences on ethical decision-making in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 19, 263–289. Mumford, M. D., Devenport, L. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, M. S., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., & Antes, A. L. (2006). Validation of ethical decision making measures: Evidence for a new set of measures. Ethics & Behavior, 16, 319–345.

46

Ethan P. Waples and Alison L. Antes

Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. L., Caughron, J. J., & Byrne, C. L. (2007). Leader cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 515–543. Mumford, M. D., Murphy, S. T., Connelly, M. S., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. T., & Devenport, L. D. (2007). Environmental inﬂuences on ethical decision-making: Climate and environmental predictors of research integrity. Ethics and Behavior, 17, 337–366. Mumford, M. D., Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., Murphy, S. T., & Devenport, L. D. (2010). Creativity and ethics: The relationship of creative and ethical problem-solving. Creativity Research Journal, 22, 74–89. Mumford, M. D., Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2009). Exposure to unethical career events: Effects on decision-making, climate, and socialization. Ethics & Behavior, 19, 351–378. Nicholas, A. (2008). Preferred learning methods of the millennial generation. The International Journal of Learning, 15, 27–34. Oddo, A. R. (1997). A framework for teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 293–297. O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterﬁeld, K. D. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 375–413. Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible solves and delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 112–125. Painter-Morland, M., Fontrodona, J., Hoffman, W. M., & Rowe, M. (2003). Conversations across continents: Teaching business ethics online. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 75–88. Phillips, S. M. (2004). Ethics education in business schools. Report of the Ethics Education Task Force to AACSB International Board of Directors, St. Louis, MO. Procario-Foley, E. G., & Bean, D. F. (2002). Institutions of higher education: Cornerstones in building ethical organizations. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 101–116. Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rest, J. R. (1986). An overview of the psychology of morality. In: J. R. Rest (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues (pp. 133–175). New York: Praeger. Riesbeck, C. K., & Schank, R. C. (1989). Inside case-based reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Ritter, B. A. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-making process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 153–164. Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1998). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress, but not all goal progress is beneﬁcial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1319–1331. Simola, S. K. (2010). Use of a ‘‘coping-modeling, problem-solving’’ program in business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 383–401. Sims, R. R. (2002). Business ethics teaching for effective learning. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 393–410. Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2003). Business ethics curriculum design: Suggestions and illustrations. Teaching Business Ethics, 7, 69–86. Sims, R. R., & Felton, E. L. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 297–312. Sonenshein, S. (2007). The role of construction, intuition, and justiﬁcation in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking–intuition model. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1022–1040.

Sensemaking and Management Ethics

47

Stenmark, C. K., Antes, A. L., Wang, X., Caughron, J. J., Thiel, C. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2010). Strategies in forecasting outcomes in ethical decision-making: Identifying and analyzing the causes of the problem. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 110–127. Swanson, D. L., & Fisher, D. G. (2011). Towards assessing business ethics education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 545–607. Trevin˜o, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person–situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11, 601–617. Trevin˜o, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32, 951–990. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232. Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 201–210. Waldman, D. A., & Korbar, T. (2004). Student assessment center performance in the prediction of early career success. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 151–167. Waples, E. P., Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). A metaanalytic investigation of business ethics instruction. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 133–151. Weber, J. A. (2006). Implementing an organizational ethics program in an academic environment: The challenges and opportunities for the Duquesne University Schools of Business. Journal of Business Ethics, 65, 23–42. Weber, J. A. (2007). Business ethics training: Insights from learning theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 70, 61–85. Weekly, J. A., & Jones, C. (1997). Video-based situational testing. Personnel Psychology, 50, 25–49. Wooten, K. C. (2001). Ethical dilemmas in human resource management: An application of a multidimensional framework, a unifying taxonomy, and applicable codes. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 159–175.

Chapter 3

Three Pedagogical Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity Joseph A. Petrick

Abstract Purpose — To provide conceptual understanding of integrity capacity as a management competency and strategic asset, as well as three pedagogical tools to advance its development. Design/methodology/approach — A review of four dimensions of management integrity capacity followed by a descriptive treatment of three pedagogical tools to advance its development: the Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), the Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), and the Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE). Findings — If integrity capacity is a critical intangible asset of individuals and organizations and if managers are held accountable for responsibly managing that intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is important for responsible management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE. Research limitations/implications — The three pedagogical tools do not constitute an exhaustive list of resources. Practical implications — The three instructional tools can be used by management ethics educators and corporate trainers to improve the moral competencies of individuals. Social implications — Advancing management integrity capacity by using the three pedagogical tools increases the future likelihood of more socially responsible management decisions. Originality/value — Both the concept of integrity capacity and the three pedagogical tools provide original ways to add value to responsible management education and performance.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

50

Joseph A. Petrick

The general pattern of irresponsible ﬁnancial risk management by a range of stakeholders that originated in the United States and caused the recent great global recession has provoked a global demand for more responsible business and government leadership and management ethics education (Kansas, 2009; Korten, 2009; Levin & Coburn, 2011; McLean & Nocera, 2010; Petrick, 2009, 2010). Speciﬁcally, in light of the educational pedigrees of convicted U.S. business criminals such as Bernard Madoff and others who have defrauded millions of stakeholders, the record of U.S. undergraduate business student cheating (Smith, Davy, & Eastering, 2004), and the published study documenting that MBA students are the biggest cheats among U.S. graduate students (McCabe, Butterﬁeld, & Trevino, 2006), multiple stakeholders are demanding to know what else U.S. business schools are doing besides credentialing more future white-collar management criminals ( Brown, 2005; Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Swanson & Frederick, 2005; Trank & Rynes, 2003; Waddock, Bodwell, & Leigh, 2006). Successfully addressing this public challenge for accountability and providing constructive pedagogical resources to improve managerial integrity are front burner concerns of responsible management educators (Petrick, 2011; Sims & Felton, 2006; Swanson & Fisher, 2011; Waddock, Rasche, Werhane, & Unruh, 2011). This chapter will ﬁrst brieﬂy treat the concept of integrity capacity as a management competency and strategic asset and then report on three time-tested pedagogical resources for advancing management integrity capacity: the Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), the Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), and the Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE).

3.1. The Concept of Integrity Capacity The concept of integrity capacity builds on ordinary language distinctions of integrity as entailing wholeness, soundness, and completeness (Carter, 1996; Erikson, 1950; Paine, 1997) but frames integrity as a capacity at both the individual and collective levels with both instrumental and intrinsic values. With regard to instrumental value, this capacity — like manufacturing capacity or ﬁnancial capacity — can be treated as an intangible strategic asset that individuals and collectives can responsibly manage to enhance their domestic and global reputational competitive advantage (Petrick & Quinn, 2001; Petrick, Scherer, Brodzinski, Quinn, & Ainina, 1999). With regard to intrinsic value, this capacity grounds, ennobles, and enables human dignity (Chen & Wang, 2002). A person of integrity has intrinsic value even when there is no external market for integrity (Taylor, 1985). Integrity capacity can be deﬁned as the individual and/or collective capability for repeated process alignment of moral awareness, deliberation, character, and conduct that demonstrates balanced, moderate, and inclusive judgment regarding moral results, rules, character, and context, to develop mature moral reasoning and relationship enhancement, and to design and/or sustain morally supportive intraorganizational and extra-organizational systems (Petrick & Quinn, 2000, 2001).

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

51

Individuals and collectives with high integrity capacity are likely to exhibit a coherent unity of purpose and action in the face of moral complexity rather than succumb to organizational inertia or simplistic, irresponsible managerial decision making (Pritchard, 2006; Trevino & Brown, 2004; Weston, 2008). Integrity capacity is a crucial foundation for responsible management education and for practicing managers to sustain trustworthy stakeholder relations in business. The increase in managers and business stakeholders who individually and collectively demonstrate integrity capacity domestically and globally is an indicator of moral progress in management and in business. As a capacity, it consists of four key dimensions: process, judgment, development, and system (Petrick, 2008a). These four dimensions both enable and reﬂect moral coherence, moral soundness, moral maturity, and the moral environment (Kolb & Sage Editors, 2012; Petrick, 2008b). Each of these dimensions reinforces and supplements other general managerial competencies in strategic management, organizational behavior and leadership, system improvement, and organizational development (Petrick & Quinn, 1997, 2001). The strategic management of organizational vision and purpose, the leveraging of intangible assets for competitive advantage, the exercise of sound operational judgment including supply and distribution chains’ moral standards, and the sustained commitment to ongoing professional, leadership, and organizational improvement are all morally supported by the four dimensions (Brown, 2005). Now each of these dimensions will be brieﬂy treated. First, process integrity capacity is the coherent alignment of individual and collective moral awareness, deliberation, character, and conduct (Petrick & Quinn, 1997). The need to address lapses in process integrity capacity is evident by the frequent disconnect between managerial moral rhetoric and actual behavior that provokes stakeholder criticism of moral hypocrisy, for example, multinational corporations that tout their public relations images as responsible corporate citizens while engaging in morally objectionable practices that pollute the natural environment and exploit indigenous workers. Ordinary language deﬁnitions of personal integrity as embodying cohesive and sincere adherence to moral principles and commitments refer to process integrity capacity. A person of integrity is commonly understood to be one who is morally aware, that is, perceives, discerns, and is sensitive to moral issues; demonstrates both autonomous reﬂection and interdependent moral deliberation in the analysis and resolution of moral problems; is ready to act ethically, that is, exercises intellectual, social, moral, emotional, and political virtues that build strong character and motivation to act ethically; and engages in responsible, aligned, and sustainable conduct, that is, takes action that is consistent with personal moral resolutions on a regular basis, even at great personal sacriﬁce, and can publicly prize the moral justiﬁcations for doing so. Moral coherence between belief and expression, awareness and deliberation, and word and deed, and among moral judgments, commitments, and actions is a hallmark of managerial and organizational process integrity (Trevino, Hartman, & Brown, 2000; Trevino & Weaver, 2003). Second, judgment integrity capacity is the balanced, moderate, and inclusive use of key ethics theories and dialogic resources in multiple stakeholder relationships to

52

Joseph A. Petrick

thoroughly analyze and resolve individual and/or collective moral issues. Ethics theories can be organized into four categories: teleological ethics theories (emphasizing moral results/purposes), deontological ethics theories (emphasizing moral rules), virtue ethics theories (emphasizing moral character), and system development ethics theories (emphasizing moral contexts) (Kekes, 1993; Petrick, 2008b). It is this pluralistic approach to orchestrating comprehensive analysis and resolution of ethical issues that avoids moral shallowness and ensures moral soundness. This categorization has been given the acronym of R2C2 (‘‘R’’ referring to moral results and rules, while ‘‘C’’ refers to character and context). Personal and organizational moral soundness is determined by the degree to which reﬂection, deliberation, and interaction with multiple stakeholders achieve good results, follow the right rules, cultivate virtuous character, and sustain morally supportive contexts throughout life without underemphasizing or overemphasizing any of these factors as managerial issues are addressed. On the other hand, greedy managers and ruthless corporations that overemphasize the achievement of good short-term ﬁnancial results while violating moral and legal rules, cultivating vicious character traits such as callous insensitivity to others, and destroying morally supportive contexts demonstrate a lack of sound moral judgment. Third, developmental integrity capacity is the cognitive and affective ﬁnal improvement stage of individual and collective moral reasoning and caring relationship formation capabilities from an initial stage of preconventional selfinterested concern (morally immature, selﬁsh connivance) to a stage of conforming to external conventional standards (partially morally mature, external-governing compliance), and to a ﬁnal stage of postconventional commitment to universal ethical principles and responsive caring relationships (morally mature, selfgoverning civic integrity) (Petrick & Quinn, 1997). Postconventional principled moral reasoning and caring relationship prioritization demonstrate moral maturity. Morally mature managers and organizations are living examples of developmental integrity capacity that have internalized their identity-conferring commitment to universal principles and values such as justice and responsive caring relationships, are emotionally attuned to all of their stakeholders, and elevate the moral expectations and performance of stakeholders to the level where just reciprocity becomes the norm. Hitler, for example, exhibited process integrity through consistency in word and behavior but never developmental integrity capacity; his goals precluded commitment to universal justice and doomed him and his followers to lives of passionately underdeveloped moral immaturity with devastating consequences. Managers and organizations that sustain the postconventional stage of moral maturity are either identifying and satisfying the wishes of the majority (e.g., ‘‘Everyone should participate in public deliberations and vote but the majority opinion will prevail in ﬁnal policy determination’’) or eliciting commitment to universal moral standards (e.g., ‘‘Whatever policies we adopt by consensus must meet universal standards of justice, care, and global citizenship’’). Individuals, ﬁrms, regimes, and societies committed to developmental integrity standards act like morally mature citizens on behalf of other internal and external stakeholders — domestically and globally.

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

53

Fourth, system integrity capacity is the demonstrable capability to design and/or sustain organizational moral infrastructures and extra-organizational relationships that provide a supportive moral environment for ethical conduct (Petrick, 2008b). The system contexts within an organization and outside it can either support or inhibit ethical action, for example, the morally impoverished environment of a corrupt organization located in a crime-infested city in a bribery-riddled nation on a heavily polluted planet inhibits viable institutionalization of system integrity capacity (Brown, 2010). Individuals and collectives that design and/or sustain supportive moral environments at the intra-organizational and extra-organizational levels demonstrate system integrity capacity. In effect, it is not enough to be a good person and a good manager but it is also important to design and shape organizational and extra-organizational contexts so that the processes for sustaining moral environments are retained and strengthened over time and are not solely dependent on the top management team currently in power. Now that the nature and value of integrity capacity as a management competency has been delineated, it is time to focus on the role of management education in its cultivation. Nearly every responsible management educator wants to prevent unethical conduct, but preventing any and all unethical behavior is an unrealistic goal for either an ethics training program or a management ethics course (Petrick, 2008a, 2008b; Whittier, Williams, & Dewett, 2006). Ethical behavior is a function of a variety of personal and situational factors, including but not limited to moral development, enforced norms, opportunity for and punishment of violations, rewards for moral conduct, self-control, and ethics training (Arnold, 2009; True, Ferrell, & Ferrell, 2005). It is unreasonable to expect that one single link in this chain of inputs can control behavior by itself (Weston, 2007). The issue becomes how management education for integrity capacity can be a strong link in the chain, rather than searching in vain for ways in which management ethics education alone can eradicate unethical behavior (Rossouw, 2002; Williams & Dewett, 2006). Furthermore, there is empirical research that substantiates the moral competencies that can be developed by using the integrity capacity framework (Petrick, 2008a). One way that management education for integrity capacity can become an even stronger link is to implement the following three tools for advancing its cultivation: the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE. To them we now turn.

3.2. Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry The ﬁrst tool is the IRMEI. The IRMEI is a quantitative assessment tool that determines the relative readiness of individuals to engage in management ethics inquiry. (See Appendix 3.A for a copy of the IRMEI and its interpretive scoring.) The result of the IRMEI is the categorization of each individual into one of the four stages of readiness to engage in management ethics inquiry so that stage-appropriate educational interventions can be delivered to more rapidly advance management ethics competency, as demonstrated by recent research (Petrick, 2010).

54

Joseph A. Petrick

The theoretical basis of the IRMEI is the transformational model of change. The transtheoretical model of change has been applied in varied transformational contexts and used to understand student-learning motivation and change (Cole, Harris, & Field, 2004; Prochaska, DiClemente, & Norcross, 1992). Originally designed for clinical assessment and treatment, the model can be modiﬁed to advance and assess management ethics education. Once modiﬁed, the transtheoretical model of change is a useful theoretical foundation for both the IRMEI and the rationale for stageappropriate sequencing of management ethics instructional interventions (activities) to advance the attainment of management ethics’ competencies (Tyler & Tyler, 2006). The model explains why some managers recognize the distinctive challenge of ethical issues and are willing to actively engage in thorough analysis and resolution, while others are seemingly unable to grasp or unwilling to act on the ethical dimensions present in a business event. Indeed, the IRMEI and the transtheoretical model of change has been particularly useful because of the distinctive characteristics of business students cross-culturally (Hill & Stewart, 1999). Numerous studies have proﬁled business students as being more motivated by the love of money than other types of students (some being much more motivated) (Cunningham, Frauman, Ivy, & Perry, 2004; Tang & Chen, 2008; Tang, Luna-Arocas, & Sutarso, 2005). If this hyperacquisitive predilection for money is regarded as a form of ‘‘mental addiction’’ prevalent among business students that may demand fulﬁllment at any cost, one way to treat that addiction and the ethical risks it poses would be to offer management ethics education in a way that incorporates a therapeutic structured process of educational intervention. Indeed, since the obscene, acquisitive love of money has been such a key motivational factor for numerous business-degreed white-collar criminals, there is some basis for adapting a clinical process modality to management ethics education, delivered at regular intervals during business careers as an antidote to the ongoing temptation of excessive love of money and to overcome ethics-avoidance disorders (Weston, 2008). In any event, this novel ‘‘therapeutic process structure’’ is rarely used by management ethics educators to deliberately overlay and guide historical, topical, theoretical, or latest-business-scandal approaches to developing management integrity capacity. As indicated in Table 3.1, the modiﬁed four stages of readiness-to-change include precontemplation, contemplation and preparation, action, and maintenance/ongoing improvement (DiClemente & Prochaska, 1982). Their parallel modiﬁed stages of intervention treatments include engagement, persuasion, active treatment, and relapse prevention/sustainable performance (Mueser, Noordsy, Drake, & Fox, 2003). Only the last change and intervention stages of the transtheoretical model have been modiﬁed to include ‘‘ongoing improvement’’ and ‘‘sustainable performance,’’ respectively. By introducing stage-appropriate management ethics activities, the model predicts that management ethics instructors who interject ‘‘activating events’’ at each appropriate stage can accelerate a process of managerial learning in relation to ethical understanding and likely future behavior that will ignite and sustain personal moral transformation (Cranton, 2002; Tyler & Tyler, 2006). In the ﬁrst change stage of precontemplation, managers are engaged by prearranging themselves into teams on the basis of their IRMEI scores. Those

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

55

Table 3.1: Modiﬁed transtheoretical model of change and sequenced management ethics activities. Stages of change

Stages of treatment

Selective stage-appropriate business ethics activities

Precontemplation

Engagement

Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI) Journal of critical incidents in academic ethics and other student-anchored experiential contexts (e.g., cheating) Classic and contemporary ﬁlm clips on management ethics scandals (e.g., Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room) Visits from ex–white-collar criminals convicted of management ethics and business law violations

This is the stage at 1. Activities that attempt to help students identify which there is no concerns and become intention to change aware of moral relevance behavior in the in business and in life foreseeable future 2. Activities that focus on recognition or understanding of negative consequences of immoral behavior

Contemplation and preparation

Persuasion

1. Activities that increase During the awareness of positive contemplative personal and business stage, people moral responses become aware that 2. Students are more a problem exists receptive to learning and begin thinking opportunities, and seriously about more experimental overcoming it, but activities can be used to have not yet made illustrate and reinforce a commitment to concepts and attitudes take action. During toward moral progress the preparation stage, people create meaningful intentions to take action

Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA) Introduction to integrity capacity model and its practical uses (e.g., Enron Case Analysis) Use of structured ethical decision-making framework (R2C2) in management ethics cases based on a pluralistic view of human nature Classic and contemporary ﬁlm clips on positive management ethics practices (e.g., The Ethical Marketplace) Exercise: management virtues and improving stakeholder relations (e.g., what emotional/ moral difference would it make to you and other internal and external stakeholders if you and/or your coworkers were more caring?) Readings: positive organizational scholarship

56

Joseph A. Petrick

Table 3.1: (Continued ) Stages of change

Stages of treatment

Selective stage-appropriate business ethics activities

Action

Active treatment

Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE) Business citizenship servicelearning projects Workplace ethical culture/ climate development projects (e.g., code of ethics, statement of values and ethics processes, Workplace Ethics Audit) Workplace community-building activities (e.g., Management Integrity Capacity Day)

This is the stage in 1. Activities that support which people the student’s determination modify their to change behavior and behavior, willingness to take speciﬁc experiences, or steps to engage in ethical environment in behavior order to overcome their problems

Relapse prevention and Maintenance and sustainable performance ongoing improvement 1. Activities that consolidate This is the stage in and advance moral which people work commitments to prevent relapse to prior behaviors 2. Activities that proactively work to maintain and and attitudes, and further develop ethical focus on continued decision-making processes developmental among multiple progress stakeholders

Institute for Business Integrity: ongoing outreach as an institutional resource for sustaining management integrity capacity on-campus and off-campus Electronic Ethics Newsletter for business students, alums, and practitioners focusing on management ethics best practices and new research Business Integrity Breakfasts that host management ethics experts to sustain civic engagement in advancing workplace ethics Management Integrity Capacity Awards to honor local individual and collective ethical leadership

teams that are completely or partially composed of managers or management students with a heightened readiness for management ethics’ inquiry and openness to change can serve as peer catalysts for morally challenging conventional beliefs and/or taking action on justiﬁed moral beliefs. Too often traditional management ethics pedagogy assumes that the instructor alone must function as the sole agent of change and that there is no need for an educational process of structured change that

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

57

engages and leverages high ethical readiness learners to collaboratively partner with the instructor to advance management ethics education. The use of the IRMEI and the adoption of the transtheoretical model of change for management ethics teaching challenges both of these assumptions and actively engages peer catalysts in a structured set of stage-appropriate activities to accelerate and sustain class momentum toward improved ethics competency and integrity capacity. In the ﬁrst change stage of precontemplation, requiring entries into a learner journal providing detailed accounts of critical incidents that managers and/or management students have experienced in academic ethics or other experientially anchored moral contexts is helpful. Showing classic and contemporary ﬁlm clips relating to management ethics scandals and/or challenges (e.g., ﬁlms about the Enron case) can stimulate moral awareness of the harmful consequences of unethical practices. Any visits from former white-collar offenders who can realistically shock managers into recognizing the adverse personal and career impacts of unethical conduct can also be helpful at this stage. In the second change stage of contemplation and preparation, persuading engaged managers or management students to consider positive personal and organizational moral practices and providing them with effective, conceptual tools to enable meaningful moral intentions to form around a growing sense of moral self-efﬁcacy is essential. At this stage vividly reinforcing the need for process integrity capacity is helpful to sustain student motivation to hone their management ethics skills. Also at this stage, since the Enron case was introduced in the ﬁrst stage, it is important to provide a comprehensive moral analysis and resolution of the Enron case using the integrity capacity model, stressing the lessons to be learned, and the positive proactive steps to take in order to prevent a recurrence (Petrick & Scherer, 2003). The use of classic and contemporary ﬁlm clips that focus on positive management ethics practices is appropriate for this stage of moral persuasion. Exercises that require teams to make presentations that select three business virtues and describe how each would improve internal and external stakeholder relations can sharpen managerial expectations of themselves and others to be ready to act ethically and concretely realize how character should count in the work environment (Solomon, 1999). Reserve readings from positive organizational scholarship (POS) can provide examples of constructive ways that individuals, groups, and organizations are successfully building and strengthening integrity capacity (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003). In the third change stage of action, activities that support the learner’s determination to change behavior and willingness to take speciﬁc steps to engage in ethical behavior are appropriate. At this stage providing students with empowering activities that develop both their competitive and cooperative moral development skills can be helpful. Ethics Bowls can be particularly engaging as a subsequent section of this chapter demonstrates. Carefully structured business citizenship service-learning projects, delivered both on-site and off-site, can develop habits in future managers that help them make a positive difference in the communities of which they are a part (Zlotkowski, 1996). Furthermore, including managers or their representatives as voting stakeholders on committees that engage

58

Joseph A. Petrick

in the ongoing assessment and development of the work ethical culture and climate provides another immediate, incentivized avenue for constructively applying integrity capacity concepts to improve the manager’s own work environment. Sponsoring a day each year (e.g., Management Integrity Capacity Day) dedicated to communitybuilding activities, run primarily by managers or management students, and including special guest lecturers on management ethics, as well as sporting and social events that involve practicing managers and non-managers mixing outside the work arena, is another action that empowers current and future managers to constructively build a more caring work community for themselves. In the fourth stage of maintenance and ongoing improvement, moral relapse (into addictive moral drifting) prevention and sustainable moral performance are enabled through institutionalized reinforcement and continual creativity relating to new managerial moral challenges. One form of institutionalized moral sustainability is through ancillary ethics centers or institutes, such as the Institute for Business Integrity (IBI) at Wright State University (WSU) in Dayton, OH. Through service, teaching, and research activities, the IBI can fulﬁll the mission of its business college to develop successful and ethical business leaders, while initiating integrity capacity projects on-campus and offcampus. Through this institutionalized form of management ethics education, current and future managers, as well as alumni, can always replenish and refresh their integrity capacity resources through reading about the latest management ethics research and organizational ethics best practices in the Business Integrity E-Newsletter. They can focus their attention on positive individual and organizational role models during events such as the Management Integrity Capacity Awards Day, which publicly honors individual and/ or collective integrity capacity award winners that meet exemplary moral standards. Interested parties can contact the IBI for conﬁdential analysis and resolution of work ethics issues or can contract with the IBI to conduct objective, professional organizational ethical climate/culture assessments or ethics audits. Ultimately, the use of the IRMEI to identify individual readiness for management ethics inquiry combined with stage-appropriate educational interventions authorized by the transtheoretical model of change can and has had a profound accelerating effect on improving targeted moral competencies and managerial integrity capacity cultivation, as demonstrated in published research ﬁndings (Petrick, 2010). By using the IRMEI, the responsible management ethics educator has the academic freedom/ corporate training prerogative to create an instructional atmosphere of group dynamics not held hostage to the most morally recalcitrant student(s)/manager(s). Even if some managers choose not to move beyond the ﬁrst two stages, they can at least witness other managers who beneﬁt from doing so and perhaps at a later time the positive examples of their peers will impact their future choices (Giacalone, 2004).

3.3. Process Integrity Capacity Auction A second tool is the PICA. The PICA is an instructional instrument consisting of an auction of life and work values under simulated time, resource, and market

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

59

constraints to determine the level of competitive and cooperative skills that can be brought to bear on the consistent ‘‘lived owning’’ of espoused theoretical values. (See Appendix 3.B for a copy of the PICA and its purposes and directions.) The result of the PICA is to provide vivid, real-time feedback to individuals about the degree of operational value consistency under simulated market conditions. One effective way to implement the PICA is to have students initially complete a paper and pencil prioritization of values before the actual auction, with their anticipated (budgeted) bids. For business students the pre-auction preparation allows them to directly indicate their value prioritizations and process integrity capacity by the budgeted number and distribution of their chip investments, that is, they literally can invest their chips or put their ‘‘money’’ where their ‘‘mouths’’ (voiced values) are. Subsequent to the auction many students experience a marked discrepancy between their initially stated values and process integrity standards (the initial chips budgeted for particular values) and their actual auction results. For them it provides a vividly engaging opportunity to reﬂect on the reasons for the divergence between espoused preferences and actual outcomes of the PICA. Some are motivated to experientially acknowledge that they may well be in the ﬁrst stage of the IRMEI and may be open to the second stage. The course instructor can usually act as the auctioneer but another class member may also be selected to perform that role. It is important to randomly call out the values for bid in the class/training room to better simulate the inopportune choices people often face in life rather than rigidly adhering to the numerical order speciﬁed in the 20 values in Appendix 3.B. This method also reinforces the managerial merit of sound planning and organizing skills that anticipate contingencies in order to be better prepared with alternate strategies for optimizing personal value priorities under time and resource pressures. As the value auction bidding proceeds, individuals will decide on the blend of competition and cooperation that they will demonstrate. Some students may be tempted to participate in more than two pooled bids since everyone in the pooled bid receives the total value won. It is the responsibility of both the transfer agent bidder and the auction auditor to accurately record and monitor compliance with the rules. If a dispute is brought before the auction referee, after the complaining parties have each paid one chip, and the referee decides in favor of the complaining parties, the members of the defending parties must each forfeit not only their remaining chips but also any values successfully obtained thus far in the auction to the complaining parties. Only the formal complaining individuals are eligible for the beneﬁts of the forfeitures. If the auction referee decides in favor of the defending parties, then the ‘‘grievance chips’’ of the initially complaining parties (one chip per complainant) are distributed to the defending parties. It is important to note what business/management students and/or practicing managers will do for money. Note the values that obtained the highest bids. The values receiving the highest bids in the PICA usually give the instructor of the course a truer reading of the actual values motivating most individuals in the class rather than those indicated by pencil on paper. Note the extent to which individual competitive or group cooperative bidding succeeded in securing the targeted values. Bring these insights to bear after the auction as the instructor debriefs students in the class.

60

Joseph A. Petrick

Many students will end the auction with uninvested chips. At the debrieﬁng, the instructor reminds those students that just as in life, individuals either use their life investments talents or lose them at death. Wasting talent through passivity or simply drifting through life, expecting that everyone is entitled to his/her value priority fulﬁllment in life without planning and effort, is not only unrealistic but also an abdication of moral responsibility for stewarding one’s talents before dying. It is a teachable moment to motivate students to ‘‘get in the game’’ of responsible life and work investments and to use the course in management ethics to sharpen and prioritize their values and cooperation skills, that is, to increase their aggregate integrity capacity.

3.4. Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event A third tool is the IEBE. The IEBE is both an inside-classroom and an outsideclassroom activity that moves individuals and teams up the IRMEI scale by actively engaging them in ethics case research, analysis, and resolution, as well as developing oral argumentation skills so that current and future managerial leaders are better able to give morally sophisticated voice to their values. The IEBE is modeled on the structure and format of the undergraduate National Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl (NIEB) Competition, which is described in detail on the homepage of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics (APPE). The educational merits of Ethics Bowls on the undergraduate national and regional levels included increased understanding of ethics analysis and case resolution, the development of an extended moral community based on a high standard of moral discourse, and an enhanced ability to engage in morally responsible democratic deliberation (Ladenson, 2001). Operationally, in the NIEB each team from more than 200 universities receives a set of 15 cases that raise issues in practical and professional ethics six weeks in advance of the competition and prepare an analysis of each case. At the competition, a moderator poses questions, based on a case randomly taken from that set, to presenting teams of three to ﬁve students. The questions may concern ethical problems on a wide range of topics, such as legal, medical, or engineering professional ethics, social and political ethics, organizational management ethics, academic ethics, and/or personal relationship ethics. A panel of three judges with expertise in the cases selected probes the teams for further justiﬁcations and argumentation after a rebuttal is provided by the nonpresenting team. Then another case is randomly selected and the previous rebuttal team now becomes the presenting team and the process repeats itself until 12 cases are addressed. Rating criteria are intelligibility, focus on ethically relevant considerations, avoidance of ethical irrelevancies, and deliberative thoughtfulness. Organizing the IEBE by event management standards is feasible since the cases, procedures, and judging guidelines provided by the APPE are available for use and could be modiﬁed for different projects in different organizational settings (Raj, Walters, & Rashid, 2009). If the Ethics Bowl event takes place within the classroom, the R2C2 format for ethics issue analysis and resolution can be directly applied to each case to

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

61

enhance judgment integrity capacity and the instructor can serve as both moderator and judge (supplemented by a class vote to determine the ‘‘winner’’ of the event). If the Ethics Bowl is held outside of the classroom, it will require many people to volunteer their support — some to serve as moderators and some to serve as judges. Nevertheless, the external event provides an excellent opportunity for management educators to connect with the larger community and invite practicing managers and other professionals to participate as moderators and judges. WSU has participated in the undergraduate Regional Intercollegiate Ethics Bowls and NIEB, earning the national championship in 2002 and runner-up championships in 2004 and 2008. Each of the award-winning teams has been trained and coached using the integrity capacity model, along with the IRMEI and the PICA. One distinctive feature of Ethics Bowls at WSU is that they are initially conducted on an intramural basis at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Student teams are formed at both levels and compete; the most successful undergraduate team earns the honor to represent the university at the regional and national competitions. Recruitment of new team members is university-wide and involves the faculty coaches and student members of prior successful WSU Ethics Bowl teams. The event has been an energizing activity that has stimulated ethics interest across the entire university at both the undergraduate and graduate levels with competing team members being awarded a WSU Presidential Medal of Honor for Extracurricular Leadership — whether or not they win regional or national awards. Another distinctive feature of Ethics Bowls at WSU is that competing team members have a postcompetition required venue that involves collaboratively generating a position paper on all 15 cases. To avoid the downsides of engaging in ethics discourse only as an adversarial competitive sport, WSU student teams are required to cooperate with each other and come up with a ﬁnal position paper that incorporates the best points from all competing teams. This combination of competition and cooperation sends an important message that responsibly managing ethics is an activity that ultimately replaces the conception of the other as opponent with an invitation to greet the other and work toward a common good. Ethics Bowls, however, need not be conﬁned exclusively to academic contexts. Ethics issues arise in all organizations and the format and structure of Ethics Bowls provide a forum for responsible deliberation about current and emerging organizational ethics issues. IEBEs can be regarded as one element in the development of any learning organization in the private, public, or nonproﬁt sectors that is interested in employee and public relations enhancements at work as well as continually updating employee handbooks, human resource policies, and strategic management options.

3.5. Conclusion The major thrust of this chapter remains promising and useful to management ethics education. If integrity capacity is a critical intangible asset of individuals and organizations and if managers are held accountable for responsibly managing that

62

Joseph A. Petrick

intangible asset in themselves and their organizations, it is important for responsible management ethics educators to familiarize themselves with the IRMEI, the PICA, and the IEBE — three proven pedagogical tools delineated in this chapter that enhance managerial integrity capacity.

References Arnold, D. (2009). Essentials of business ethics. New York: Wiley. Brown, M. (2005). Corporate integrity: Rethinking organizational ethics and leadership. New York: Cambridge University Press. Brown, M. (2010). Civilizing the economy: A new economics of provision. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cameron, K., Dutton, J., & Quinn, R. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Carter, S. (1996). Integrity. New York: Harper Perennial. Chen, L., & Wang, C. (2002). The concept of integrity in China and Western countries: Its difference and implications. Journal of Philosophy Research, 8, 35–40. Cole, M., Harris, S., & Field, H. (2004). Stages of learning motivation: Development and validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(7), 1421–1456. Cranton, P. (2002). Professional development as transformative learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cunningham, P., Frauman, E., Ivy, M., & Perry, T. (2004). The value of money and leisure and college student’s choice of major. SCHOLE: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 19, 65–72. DiClemente, C., & Prochaska, J. (1982). Self-change and therapy change of smoking behavior: A comparison of processes of change in cessation and maintenance. Addictive Behaviors, 7, 133–142. Erikson, E. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: W.W. Norton. Giacalone, R. (2004). A transcendant business education for the 21st century. Academy of Management Journal, 3(4), 415–420. Giacalone, R., & Thompson, K. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266–277. Hill, A., & Stewart, I. (1999). Character education in business schools: Pedagogical strategies. Teaching Business Ethics, 3, 179–193. Kansas, D. (2009). The Wall Street Journal guide to the end of Wall Street as we know it. New York: Collins Business. Kekes, J. (1993). The morality of pluralism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Kolb, R., & Sage Editors (2012). Sage brief guide to business ethics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Korten, D. (2009). Agenda for a new economy: From phantom wealth to real wealth. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Ladenson, R. (2001). The educational signiﬁcance of the Ethics Bowl. Teaching Ethics, 6, 63–78. Levin, C., & Coburn, T. (2011). Wall Street and the ﬁnancial crisis: Anatomy of a ﬁnancial collapse. Washington, D.C.: Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. McCabe, D., Butterﬁeld, K., & Trevino, L. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 294–306. McConnaughy, E., Prochaska, J., & Velicer, W. (1983). Stages of change in psychotherapy: Measurement and sample proﬁles. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 20, 368–375.

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

63

McLean, B., & Nocera, J. (2010). All the devils are here: The hidden history of the ﬁnancial crisis. New York: Penguin. Mueser, K., Noordsy, D., Drake, R., & Fox, L. (2003). Integrated treatment for dual disorders: A guide to effective practice. New York: Guilford Press. Paine, L. (1997). Leadership, ethics, and organizational integrity. Chicago: Irwin. Petrick, J. (2008a). Using the business integrity capacity model to advance business ethics education. In: D. Swanson & D. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics education (pp. 103–124). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Petrick, J. (2008b). Integrity. In: R. Kolb (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business ethics and society (pp. 1141–1144). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Petrick, J. (2009). Toward responsible global ﬁnancial risk management: The reckoning and reform recommendations. Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Business, 10, 1–33. Petrick, J. (2010). Sustainable stakeholder capitalism and redesigning management education: Lessons generated from the great global recession. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 40, 101–124. Petrick, J. (2011). The measured impact of the transtheoretical model of educational change on advancing business ethics education. In: D. Swanson & D. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics education (pp. 335–360). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (1997). Management ethics: Integrity at work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (2000). The integrity capacity construct and moral progress in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 3–18. Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. (2001). The challenge of leadership accountability for integrity capacity as a strategic asset. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 331–343. Petrick, J., Scherer, K., Brodzinski, J., Quinn, J., & Ainina, F. (1999). Global leadership skills and reputational capital: Intangible resources for sustainable competitive advantage in the 21st century. Academy of Management Executive, 13(1), 58–69. Petrick, J., & Scherer, R. (2003). The Enron scandal and the neglect of management integrity capacity. Mid-American Journal of Business, 18(1), 37–50. Pritchard, M. (2006). Professional integrity: Thinking ethically. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Prochaska, J., DiClemente, C., & Norcross, J. (1992). In search of how people change. American Psychologist, 47(9), 1102–1114. Raj, R., Walters, P., & Rashid, T. (2009). Events management: An integrated and practical approach. Los Angeles: Sage. Rossouw, G. (2002). Three approaches to teaching business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 411–433. Sims, R., & Felton, E. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(3), 297–312. Smith, K., Davy, J., & Eastering, D. (2004). An examination of cheating and its antecedents among marketing and management majors. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 63–80. Solomon, R. (1999). A better way to think about business: How personal integrity leads to corporate success. New York: Oxford University Press. Swanson, D., & Fisher, D. (Eds). (2011). Toward assessing business ethics education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Swanson, D., & Frederick, W. (2005). Denial and leadership in business ethics education. In: O. Ferrell & R. Peterson (Eds), Business ethics: The new challenge for business schools and corporate leaders (pp. 222–240). New York: M.E. Sharpe.

64

Joseph A. Petrick

Tang, T., & Chen, Y. (2008). Intelligence vs. wisdom: The love of money, Machiavellianism, and unethical behavior across college major and gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 1–26. Tang, T., Luna-Arocas, R., & Sutarso, T. (2005). From income to pay satisfaction: The love of money and pay equity comparison as mediators and culture (the U.S. and Spain) and gender as moderators. Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 3(1), 7–26. Taylor, G. (1985). Integrity: Pride, shame and guilt. Oxford, UK: The Alexander Press. Trank, C., & Rynes, S. (2003). Who moved our cheese? Reclaiming professionalism in business education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 189–205. Trevino, L., & Brown, M. (2004). Managing to be ethical: Debunking ﬁve business ethics myths. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 69–81. Trevino, L., Hartman, L., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142. Trevino, L., & Weaver, G. (2003). Managing ethics in business organizations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. True, S. L., Ferrell, L., & Ferrell, O. C. (2005). Fulﬁlling our obligation: Perspectives on teaching business ethics. Kennesaw, GA: Kennesaw University Press. Tyler, C., & Tyler, J. (2006). Applying the transtheoretical model of change to the sequencing of ethics instruction in business education. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 45–64. Waddock, S., Bodwell, C., & Leigh, J. (2006). Total responsibility management. Shefﬁeld, UK: Greenleaf Publishers. Waddock, S., Rasche, A., Werhane, P., & Unruh, G. (2011). The principles for responsible management education: Implications for implementation and assessment. In: D. Swanson & D. Fisher (Eds), Toward assessing business ethics education (pp. 13–28). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Weston, A. (2007). Creative problem solving in ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weston, A. (2008). A 21st century ethical toolbox. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Whittier, N., Williams, S., & Dewett, T. (2006). Evaluating ethical decision making models: A review and application. Society and Business Review, 4, 94–112. Williams, S., & Dewett, T. (2006). Yes, you can teach business ethics: A review and research agenda. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12, 109–120. Zlotkowski, E. (1996). Opportunity for all: Linking service-learning and business education. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 5–19.

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

65

Appendix 3.A. Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI) r Purpose: This pre-course survey is designed to assess preliminary readiness to address current management ethics beliefs. Each statement describes how a student might feel when starting a course. Directions: Please indicate the extent to which you tend to agree with each statement. In each case, make your choice in terms of how you feel right now, not what you have felt in the past or would like to feel. There are ﬁve possible responses to each of the items in the questionnaire: strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, and strongly agree. Circle the number that best describes how much you agree or disagree with each statement.

1. It might be worthwhile to examine my management ethics beliefs 2. I think I might be ready for some moral selfimprovement 3. I am doing something about my management ethics beliefs that had been bothering me 4. As far as I’m concerned, I don’t have any management ethics beliefs that need changing 5. I’m not aware of any issues with my management ethics beliefs. I don’t see the relevance of this to my management education 6. It concerns me that I might slip back into negative management ethics beliefs I have already changed, so I am here to sustain positive management ethics beliefs 7. I am ﬁnally taking some action based on my management ethics beliefs 8. I’ve been thinking that I might want to change some

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Undecided

Agree

Strongly agree

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

66

Joseph A. Petrick

of my management ethics beliefs 9. I have been successful in building sound management ethics beliefs, but I’m not sure I can keep up the effort on my own 10. At times changing my management ethics beliefs is difﬁcult, but I’m trying 11. Being here is pretty much of a waste of time for me because management ethics has nothing to do with me or my future career 12. I’m hoping this class will help me to better understand my management ethics beliefs 13. I guess I have faulty management ethics beliefs, but they’re nothing that I really need to change 14. I am working hard to change my management ethics beliefs 15. I have unexamined management ethics beliefs and I really think I should change them 16. I’m not sustaining the positive management ethics beliefs for which I have already changed as well as I had hoped, and I’m here to stop this 17. Even though I am not always successful in changing my management ethics beliefs, I am at least critically examining them 18. I thought once I had changed my management ethics beliefs they would

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Undecided

Agree

Strongly agree

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

remain stable, but sometimes I still ﬁnd myself reverting to my old views 19. I wish I had more ideas on how to view management ethics 20. I have started working on my personal ethics beliefs but I would like help 21. Maybe this class will be able to open my mind about the value of management ethics beliefs 22. I may need a boost right now to help me maintain the management ethics’ belief changes I’ve already made 23. I may have faulty management ethics beliefs, but I don’t really think I do 24. I hope that this class will have some good management ethics advice for me 25. Anyone can talk about changing management ethics beliefs; I’m actually doing something about them 26. All this talk about management ethics is boring and irrelevant. Why can’t people just believe whatever they want? 27. I’m here to prevent myself from going back to my old management ethics’ views 28. It is frustrating, but I feel I might be having a recurrence of unethical management beliefs I

67

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Undecided

Agree

Strongly agree

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

68

Joseph A. Petrick

thought I had already resolved 29. I have some concerns about management ethics, but so does everyone. Why spend time thinking about the topic? 30. I am actively examining my management ethics beliefs 31. I would rather cope with my faulty management ethics beliefs than try to change them 32. After all I had done to try and change my former management ethics beliefs, every now and again they come back to haunt me

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Undecided

Agree

Strongly agree

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

Scoring key: Precontemplation items

4, 5, 11, 13, 23, 26, 29, 31

Contemplation items

1, 2, 8, 12, 15, 19, 21, 24

Action items

3, 7, 10, 14, 17, 20, 25, 30

Maintenance items 6, 9, 16, 18, 22, 27, 28, 32 Description: The scale is designed to be a continuous measure. Thus, subjects can score high on more than one of the four stages. To score, add up the total number for each item corresponding to each of the four subscales. Higher scores indicate a greater likelihood to be currently in that stage of change regarding management ethics beliefs. Source: McConnaughy et al. (1983). Copyright r Institute for Business Integrity. Reproduced with permission.

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity

69

Appendix 3.B. Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA) r Purposes: Since management ethics values are signiﬁcant in individual, organizational, and systemic adjustments to and transformations of reality, it is important to understand basic lived (as opposed to only theoretical) alignment of value priorities. The purposes of PICA are the following: (1) (2) (3) (4)

to determine those work and life values that are of greatest importance to you; to explore the degree of trust you have in the group; to examine how well you compete and cooperate; and to invite reﬂective consideration of your accountability for personal and professional life value alignments and priorities.

Directions: (1) Ten chips representing 10 life investment talents are to be used for bidding (one chip ¼ one talent). Only those chips initially provided will be accepted as legal tender for any value purchased. (2) You may elect to pool your resources (your chips) with other people in order to purchase a particularly high-priced value. This means that two or more people may combine their funds and have one person bid for a desired value. You are allowed to participate and win in such a pool two times only. If and when you decide to enter a pooled bid, deposit your talent and sign a roster list with the amount you deposited. Participation in more than two pooled bids results in the depositor’s elimination from the auction, so keep track of any pooled bidding commitments. (3) The selected transfer agent bidder (person who collects, coordinates, and actually bids for others) may extract as many ‘‘talent transaction fees’’ (chips for representing others) as the market will bear. The transfer agent bidder may not mix funds between pools and personal resources. If fund mixing occurs, the transfer agent bidder will be eliminated from the auction, so transfer agent bidders have the added responsibility to keep careful track of who pays what amount for which value. (4) The appointed or selected auction auditor is responsible for recording and monitoring the activities of the transfer agent bidder, the auctioneer, and the individual and collective bids made. If there are any unwarranted process irregularities, as determined by the auditor, the individuals and groups involved are to be eliminated from the auction. (5) The auctioneer’s task is to collect the highest number of chips possible in the course of the auction. After the auction has begun, no further questions will be answered by the auctioneer. The only other questions that can be asked or any conﬂicts resolved are to be directed to the selected or appointed auction referee. In any dispute involving the auction auditor determinations, the auction referee is the ﬁnal authority. Individuals who bring complaints to the auction referee must each pay one chip before the auction referee decision is rendered; otherwise the auction referee will accept the status quo by default. The decision of the auction referee after analyzing the facts of the case is ﬁnal.

70

Joseph A. Petrick

(6) As in life, you either use your life investment talents or lose them. Also as in life, the sequence of value investment opportunities will not follow a predictable, logical sequence, so value priority clarity is important to capitalize on your window of opportunity. (7) After the auction, the results of all bidding are to be publicly posted. Individuals are to focus and write on process values lessons learned: (1) Did you gain what you wanted by your own bidding? By pooled bidding? Why? Why not? (2) What did you learn about your lived value priorities? (3) What would you do differently? Why? List of values

1.

All the food and drink you want without gaining weight

2.

The opportunity to exercise economic leadership at the state, national, and international levels

3.

The opportunity to exercise political leadership at the state, national, and international levels

4.

The admiration of good friends due to your honorable reputation

5.

Travel and tickets to any 10 cultural/athletic events every year for your lifetime

6.

Starting your own business and earning $1,000,000 as its CEO in ﬁve years

7.

A happy, healthy family

8.

Recognition as the most physically attractive person in the world

9.

A long life free of illness all the time

10.

Become a multimillionaire by winning the lottery

11.

Earnest perseverance, resilience, and courage in overcoming obstacles

Amount budgeted

Amount bid

Top bid

Gained by and for yourself

Gained with others

Tools to Advance Management Integrity Capacity List of values

12.

Become a billionaire through illegal and unethical means

13.

A lovely home in a beautiful setting

14.

A high-paying entry-level position in your ﬁeld on graduation

15.

The elimination of poverty from the world

16.

International fame and renown for your achievements

17.

A wise understanding of life

18.

As much sexual pleasure as you want with anyone anytime

19.

The highest success in your chosen profession/career

20.

Being deeply in love with someone

Amount budgeted

Amount bid

Top bid

Copyright r Institute for Business Integrity. Reproduced with permission.

Gained by and for yourself

71

Gained with others

Chapter 4

Using Literature to Encourage Moral Engagement in Business Ethics Courses Louis C. Gasper

Abstract Purpose — Propose a method of engaging the moral imagination in business ethics classes. Approach — Critically examines pedagogical materials in business ethics to identify deﬁciencies that hinder engagement of the student’s moral imagination. An alternative or supplement is proposed that uses stories taken from imaginative literature and analyzes them in a virtue ethic framework. The intended result is to decrease the distance between the experience in the classroom and performance in meeting ethical challenges at work. Practical implications — A great deal has been omitted in current teaching methods in business ethics, evidenced by the practical results of continuing spectacular ethical lapses in business. A substantial reorientation needs to be undertaken in how business ethics is taught. Social implications — Affecting the moral imagination of business students, schools can help raise the ethical consciousness and behavior of business people of the future. In turn, this can only help raise the general tone of ethical behavior in society at large. Originality/value of chapter — Very little has been done in this area. Except for a few schools where this proposed approach is already used, there is almost virgin ground for the method, even as to knowledge of what is required.

Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia, HealthSouth, Tyco, Imclone, Ahold, Arthur Andersen, Martha Stewart, Bernard Madoff, y, the list of companies and persons touched by serious lapses in ethics in recent years goes on and on and makes for dreary reading.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

74

Louis C. Gasper

Corporate ethics scandals have been so many and so serious that they are beginning to fall off the front page. An example is Quadrangle Group. Headlines were garnered by Enron and Bernard Madoff and Arthur Andersen, but Steve Rattner and Quadrangle and their part in the New York State public pension kickback scandal are scarcely noticed on the national scene. Yet these signal lapses come after decades during which business schools quite generally increased the resources dedicated to teaching business ethics. The trend started in the1970s and built momentum through the latter part of the 20th century. In 2002, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business recommended that schools incorporate ethics courses in their curricula. And still the ethical failures multiply. Professor McCabe (McCabe, Trevino, & Butterﬁeld, 2001; McCabe, Trevino, & Butterﬁeld, 2006) has reported that extensive survey data demonstrate that MBA students cheat more than students in other graduate programs. Despite the multiplication of ethics courses, business students are, if anything, cheating more than ever. Worse yet, it seems that business students do not arrive at business school with a stronger propensity to cheat than that exhibited by their peers. Observers can be forgiven for concluding that with respect to inculcating ethics and resilient values, business schools have proven worse than useless. The present chapter suggests that an additional pedagogical method can be useful in reducing the distance between the classroom and the business place when it comes to actually making sound decisions in which ethical challenges are encountered. That method is one that has not received extensive attention in the literature on business ethics, most likely because it is so little used. The method can be characterized by a single word: ‘‘story.’’ This method was pioneered by Robert Coles, a psychiatrist who successfully introduced it into several Harvard professional curricula courses focused on connecting the student to his professional life through the use of stories. Coles discovered that the student enters in imagination into the life of a literary character and in that way not only observes but also experiences vicariously the development of that character (1989). Examining that character development, the student gains understanding of his/her own character. By working on the moral imagination, the literary method promises more success in actually altering moral character than can be obtained by the dispassionate analysis of principles and cases.

4.1. Sources of Failure in Business Ethics Another important obstacle to business ethics education is that the majority of business schools, so they claim, include ethics in their business curricula by requiring that the ethics of the subject of a course be covered inside that course. Yet few business teachers have had any formal training, even a workshop, in ethics or how to teach ethics. Requiring them to teach something about the ethics of a subject must assume that a person of goodwill who has not been accused of any serious ethical lapse will be well equipped to instruct in ethics. Granted, the teacher may model good

Encouraging Moral Engagement

75

ethical behavior, but that is not at all the same thing as teaching it, any more than playing baseball is the same thing as coaching it. One must suspect that the teachers, knowing themselves embarrassed to make more than a token effort at teaching the ethics of their subject, end up doing very little, and none at all in a systematic way. We should perhaps be thankful for that, as a wrong-headed teacher can do a great deal of damage even with all goodwill. If business students do not get their ethics, good or bad, from the ethics courses they take or from the ethics lectures and cases presented to them in other courses, then what is it in business schools that corrupts them? We can take it as given that their professors are trying to turn out good business people, not liars and cheats. The business faculty on the whole appear to live decent lives in which they model good character quite as well as the faculty in other disciplines. So it is not likely that either the faculty are contradicting the message in the ethics courses or the students are emulating bad behavior among the faculty. The most cogent likely explanation is that they are emulating what they think is the behavior that is successful in business. From a philosophical viewpoint, business is shot through with positivism. What works, what is most efﬁcient, is accorded the highest value and is what we routinely teach our students. From the very beginning of a student’s business education, ethics may be difﬁcult to inculcate because students often select a business major with the underlying idea that they need to learn how to win against other competitors. That is, they often have the idea, rarely conscious, that there is just so much wealth available for them to gain, and the gain comes by keeping that wealth away from others. Implicitly, they think they are in what economists call a zero-sum game in which one participant’s gain is another’s deprivation. Focused on winning, they have no scruples about depriving others because that is the nature of the ‘‘game.’’ Granted that the business person must work in collaboration with, not in competition with, customers and suppliers and employees, even that collaboration is seen as a matter of winning the greater advantage in any exchange, at the expense of the other party. Business students are deliberately encouraged to compete. Indeed, we would think it strange if it were otherwise. But in this competition, the proﬁt or value goal is singular and the means to it are judged entirely on the basis of efﬁciency. When ethics is formally introduced into this milieu, it is almost inevitably treated as another constraint in a problem of constrained maximization of shareholder value. It is not treated itself as a good. One of the principal things taught to business students, day in and day out, is the necessity to reduce costs. But this must be done by optimization, which broadly means not reducing one cost at a time but coordinating cost control across the board. In other words, one takes care that what is done to reduce cost in one direction does not cause a problem that raises costs even more in another way. Being ethical is treated as a cost, so the student seeks to reduce that cost. When he/she cannot see that cheating causes a reduction in discounted present value, all his/her training is toward lowering or breaking altogether the ethics constraint. This idea is only reinforced when academic cheating is insufﬁciently penalized. As the ‘‘business model’’ has penetrated the administration of our schools, learning is becoming

76

Louis C. Gasper

viewed as a ‘‘product’’ and the student as a ‘‘customer,’’ and such things as market share and enhanced revenues are the new objectives. The full ﬂowering of this is seen at Texas A&M University, where faculty have been subjected to an explicit efﬁciency (cost/beneﬁt) calculation (Mangan, 2010). It is beyond the scope of this chapter to probe the reasons for this trend and its advantages and costs. Here we need only note that it is a basic axiom of business that the customer has to be satisﬁed, that we do not alienate a paying customer if revenues are important to us. Dismissing a student for cheating is then a drag on the bottom line and is impliedly discouraged. The student cannot fail to notice a forgiving and even relaxed attitude toward cheating, and easily comes to the conclusion that sales outrank ethics. Highly competent and intensive ethics training can be powerless against this inﬂuence. Our problem, then, is not that ethics is not taught at all, or that faculty model bad behavior, but that the unspoken yet pervasive message is that behaving ethically is a cost that may often be reduced in order to enhance the bottom line. This line of approach can be seen in the claims that good ethics is good business, in the sense that long-term success is elusive without sound ethics. But to the students, that rings hollow. Students are not fools; they know that ethical behavior often enough is not proﬁtable business whether in the short term or for the long run. When they see the truth, that ethics can be costly without any commensurate value added to the company, their business training tells them to abandon ethics so far as that helps and does not hurt the bottom line. In few words, this comes down to ‘‘Don’t get caught.’’ This is actually reinforced by the unfortunate emphasis on ‘‘social’’ ethics, on environmental responsibility and ‘‘sustainability.’’ Inevitably, what comes across to the student in these dimensions is ‘‘Do just as much as will satisfy people who are in a position to pressure your company. You have to balance the costs of social responsibility against the costs that can be visited on your company if you do not appear to be socially responsible to an acceptable threshold.’’ This is social responsibility only in the shallowest sense. If this analysis is correct, then something very different needs to be introduced in the way of ethics education and training in business schools. What is wanting is a way to bring the student to believe that there is a good that ethical behavior brings and that the ethical good matters to the interior person more than can any external consideration.

4.2. Seeking ‘‘Internalization’’ It may be thought at this point that this chapter is about to traverse again the welltrod path of those who think that students should be brought to ‘‘internalize’’ ethical values, so that they behave as socially aware adults and not as selﬁsh children. But not so. That approach is wrong from the start because it still deals in ethical values that are taken to be things external to the person and that therefore must be alien to the natural person even when ‘‘internalized.’’ A parallel is the idea that ‘‘clothes make the man.’’ Even if that were true, and to the extent that it is true, it is also true

Encouraging Moral Engagement

77

that the person is not changed as his/her clothes change. The clothes do not become part of who the person is, but can be put off quite as easily as they are put on, perhaps more so. Ethical values that are internalized but not integrated are still not part of who the person is, of what it is that makes the self. A course in business ethics is almost always anchored in adopted materials that include a textbook and cases. These are often ‘‘ﬁlled out’’ with articles from both the professional literature and the current news press. Part of the problem with how business ethics is taught is precisely in the exclusive reliance on textbooks and cases.

4.2.1.

Business Ethics Textbooks

From his own experience in attempting to do without a textbook, the present author has concluded that in teaching business ethics a textbook of some kind is needed. It is possible that a set of readings may serve in place of a textbook, but something is needed by which to present to the student a framework on which he/she may begin to put structure on what otherwise is likely to be inchoate thinking about ethical matters. Unfortunately, in too many instances the reluctance to ‘‘push’’ a particular ethical theory leads to a failure to make clear that the way in which a person thinks about ethics is vitally important. Consequently, textbooks in business ethics very commonly present several different ‘‘theories’’ of ethics. There are usually presentations of ethics based in utilitarianism, rights theory, deontological ‘‘code’’ behavior, distributive justice, and social contract. Understandably, these presentations are more in the nature of summary descriptions than they are rigorous analyses. On the whole, however, they are adequately serviceable as introductions to those who are very unlikely to have any background in philosophy. Each presentation is ordinarily accompanied by an example of the application of the principles of the particular moral philosophy to a case. The author often shows how the different principles will yield different results in application. The author may opine that one theory seems to do a better job of coming up with a satisfactory conclusion than do the others, but what is almost universally missing is a deﬁnite statement that one of the theories is true. The textbooks, that is, are eclectic and thereby encourage the student to consider that ethical thinking can be eclectic, too. The result is that, one way or another, the student can end up preferring that ethical theory that gets the results he/she desires. When this results, all that is being done is to enhance the student’s skill at rationalizing, improving the capacity to convince others that what he/she did is right. One could scarcely expect anything else. As the various methods of ethical analysis are presented only in an introductory way, there is not such a deep investigation as to enable the student to have a defensible grasp of any of the theories, or therefore to have a sound basis on which to adhere to one theory instead of another. The teacher in the classroom, of course, can change this. He/she can present the subject in such a way as to recommend strongly one system instead of another. Still, by adopting a textbook that presents alternative theories as more or

78

Louis C. Gasper

less equal in standing, the teacher is handicapped in trying to inculcate one of those theories. The student will remember that there are other ways of ethical thinking and can easily consider, once out of the teacher’s inﬂuence, that eclecticism is acceptable as a working method of ethical analysis.

4.2.2.

Cases in Business Ethics

Instructors in business ethics very commonly, perhaps universally, at least supplement their teaching of ethical principles with cases by which the principles can be illustrated and applied. Some, indeed, teach exclusively from cases and it can be argued that this is better than relying on a textbook. It is hard to imagine, and perhaps it would be foolhardy, to do without cases. But even the best cases have a marked deﬁciency that would be difﬁcult for them to overcome. Although a case usually will not explicitly introduce the student to different ethical theories, it is very likely to be written with a particular viewpoint. The use of several cases from different authors may increase the likelihood that the student will pick up on the fact that there is a viewpoint embedded in a case, and begin to think seriously about whether one viewpoint is more valid than another. This is all to the good. However, cases have the limitation of being mostly presentations of facts and data. The selection of these facts is what conveys a particular viewpoint. Assuming there is real depth in the problem that the case is intended to illuminate, presenting all the pertinent facts is perhaps not even possible within the conﬁnes of a reasonably sized case. More, however, the facts tend to be given with little analysis of character. Indeed, few cases even have characters as a concern. If the case includes questions, these, too, are ways in which the viewpoint of the author is conveyed. The skillful teacher will mount his/her own questions in order to examine that viewpoint or to assert another. What is necessarily true of all cases, however, is that they are presented as cases, as disconnected events. The student is asked to look at a case as if he/she were a physician considering a medical case. One of the important skills required of a medical practitioner is the capacity to consider the patient so to speak as a medical specimen. Emotional involvement is recognized as being often deadly — sometimes literally so — to medical judgment. But just as a physician in a weekly staff meeting will examine with utter dispassion a case presented by staff, so the business ethics student will stand apart from any kind of inner involvement in an ethics case. We understand and accept and even demand this of our medical practitioners. But the difﬁculty in ethics is that we are called on not to make decisions for others, as if they were patients depending on our judgment for their care, but must make decisions for ourselves. Dispassion is certainly desirable as we think out our own behavioral choices, but it is obviously much more difﬁcult to achieve than it is with respect to a case. The difﬁculty with case studies is that they train the student in analysis and decision making as a completely detached person, but that is not the mode in which ethical decisions are made in the real world. Cases give valuable practice in applying abstract principles to particular problems, but they do so outside the kind of context in which

Encouraging Moral Engagement

79

ethical difﬁculties are set in the real world. Lacking that, the ‘‘internalization’’ of ethical values and ways of thinking is at best difﬁcult to achieve. The inner person of the student is simply insufﬁciently engaged by cases for them to have a strong inﬂuence. A person has to have a very strong imagination to transcend the detachment that is natural to using cases, but without that imagination the inner person of the student can scarcely be expected to become engaged either in the realities lying behind the case or in the values the teacher or case author intend to inculcate.

4.3. The Imaginative Alternative Because both textbooks and cases are insufﬁcient to engage the inner person of the student, because they do not excite the student’s imagination to a high enough level, a pedagogical method that directly engages the imagination can be very useful. Abstractly, if one wants to engage the imagination, then it seems obvious that imaginative materials should be used. Yet very few business schools make use of imaginative literature as a resource for business ethics. This is no doubt due to the fact that we would not think of using imaginative literature to teach the principles of ﬁnance or logistics, for example. It is not the way we do things in business school, and for most subjects we have good reason to use more didactic methods. We certainly would like our students to be imaginative in ﬁnding solutions to ﬁnancial and logistical problems, but the kind of imagination that is used in such problems is one that is grounded in concrete being. There is a great deal to dislike about the Enlightenment’s forced distinction between what is and what ought to be, but it has about it an element of truth. When we engineer a new ﬁnancial instrument, we do so to reach a concrete goal that is justiﬁed solely by its efﬁciency toward a value maximization goal. It is supposed, of course, that the instrument is legal and that its use accords with law. If we were to ask a question such as ‘‘Ought this instrument to exist,’’ the answer would be seen by most business people as depending entirely on whether the instrument is more efﬁcient than other instruments available to do the same job. The only ‘‘ethical’’ concern would be whether it conforms to law and market rules. Assuming it does, then whether it ‘‘ought’’ to exist is reduced to whether it ‘‘is’’ efﬁcient. The moral imagination is not engaged, and business schools do not seek to have it engaged. Carrying that same approach into business ethics, business schools generally reduce what might be ethical questions of what ‘‘ought’’ to be to empirical questions of what ‘‘is’’ in concrete fact. This will not answer if we take seriously the proposition that what ought to be has a moral dimension, not only an empirical one. The imagination that must be engaged is the moral imagination.

4.4. Different Kinds of Imagination To situate this clearly, it is useful to distinguish the moral from other kinds of imagination. Philosophers and psychologists have worked on categorizing different

80

Louis C. Gasper

sorts of imagination. An early example of one such examination of types of imagination is the one made by Bartlett (1928). Perhaps the division most commonly encountered in the literatures of psychology, philosophy, and art is that between what are usually called the passive and creative imaginations. This was set down by Ribot (1903) long ago. But it has been argued by Kind (2005) that this distinction makes imagination depend too much on imagery. Similarly, Carrier (1973) proposed that the usual division had to be supplemented by a third kind of intellectual imagination that is more logically conceptual than imagistic. It is much like the scientiﬁc imagination that Peirce (1931) mentioned. The taxonomic discussion in the professional literature is not ended. No single scheme has been proposed to answer to every need for such a taxonomy. There can be no objection, then, to advancing a new scheme for the purposes of the present chapter.

4.4.1.

Fantasy and Imagery

One sort of imagination may be called the fantastic imagination, the imagination that results in fantasy. This kind of imagination has only a tenuous connection to reality and easily goes beyond ‘‘what might be.’’ The content of dreams may well be the result of such imagination. The fantasies of science ﬁctionists are conscious products of it. We do not try to develop such an imagination in business students, for it is not often of use, and perhaps more often than not is counterproductive, leading to nothing more than daydreaming. Another sort of imagination that is not far removed from the fantastic imagination, and may simply be a subdivision of it, is what can be called the imagistic imagination. This is the source of the right-brain seated kind of activity that is essential to visual artists. Whereas the fantastic imagination can deal in concepts alone, images and appearances are crucial for the imagistic imagination. We who teach business students might be pleased that one of them has a well-developed visual imagination, but we do not ﬁnd it of great use in the study and practice of most types of business endeavor.

4.4.2.

The Conceptual Imagination, Passive and Constructive

The kind of imagination that we do seek to develop is what we may call the conceptual imagination. Unlike fantasy, it is closely bound to reality, and unlike the artistic imagination it deals much less in images than it does in concepts. We can introduce the standard division between the passive and the constructive or creative into the idea of the conceptual imagination. The passive imagination is one that searches out links between concepts and is an essential part of the capacity to learn, because we learn not only by concepts but also by connections. Only by the connections in conceptual imagination can we have a true grasp of reality. At the

Encouraging Moral Engagement

81

lowest level, the passive conceptual imagination is exercised in mnemonic memorization of facts. At a much higher level, the imagining of real links between things becomes insight. Certainly we encourage this sort of imagination, perhaps more by requiring it than by teaching it. The conceptual imagination can be not passive but constructive. The constructive imagination conjures up new, realistically possible links among things. This is the sort of imagination we are requiring when we demand of our students that they come up with an ‘‘imaginative solution’’ to a problem. It is the imagination of inventors as well as successful business persons. Bill Gates, for example, imagined a link between an individual person and a computer, a link that was dedicated and exclusive. The desktop computer resulted and by answering the need for such a link, Bill Gates was very successful. This is, clearly, a kind of imagination we want not only to encourage but also to actively develop, and much of our curriculum is designed to do just that. In partnership with passive imagination, the constructive imagination opens up new territory and ﬁnds solutions to problems that have no exact parallel in experience.

4.4.3.

Moral Imagination

But there is a yet another kind of imagination. If we try to use the constructive imagination in approaching ethical concerns, we are trying to ﬁnd new connections, and must treat the ethical problem as just that: a problem for which there must be a solution. What is missing, even if we ﬁnd a ‘‘solution,’’ is engagement. The student tries to ﬁnd a solution to the exam problem because ﬁnding it will bring some external good the student seeks, such as a better grade in the course. But it scarcely, if at all, touches his/her inner person, who he/she is in character. Ethical problems, however, are not problems in the exam problem sense. They are things that touch who a person is and who he/she will become, if they are truly ethical in nature. For this, something more is needed than a constructive imagination. This kind of imagination is the moral imagination. It is characterized above all by empathy, for which reason it might be called alternatively the empathetic imagination. It is by such imagination that we enter into the inmost concerns of others. That is the basis of a ‘‘social conscience’’ and is called on when we are asked to work on problems of ‘‘social justice.’’ But perhaps more importantly, the moral imagination engages with the person’s own objective self, with who he/she is and the self he/she may become. Without this, we cannot take hold of our own behavior and cannot develop ourselves. An important link between the conceptual and moral imaginations that distinguishes them from the fantastic and imagistic imaginations is that both of them are informed by a goal. The fantastic imagination and the imagistic may work ﬁne if they just work. But the constructive imagination works well only if it advances us toward something that we desire. Likewise, the moral imagination requires some goal, some overall guidance that makes an ethical choice right or wrong. The person who thinks deeply of his/her life will see that to have meaning his/her life must have

82

Louis C. Gasper

an end that fulﬁlls purpose. The good life well led is the one that is shaped in every act to advance toward that end. Of course, life is not ﬁlled with contemplation of one’s ﬁnal end. Quotidian concerns are with such things as getting to the ofﬁce on time, ﬁnishing the report, making the sale, and so on and on, day after day. But if these concerns, these more immediate goals make sense, it is because they are instrumental toward attaining that ﬁnal end. If we now review what we have established so far, we see that the moral imagination has to do with character and with development toward an end. This is very nearly a deﬁnition of ‘‘story.’’ The successful life, the good life well led, is one that involves character and its development, and something like a plot that moves from beginning through the middle to a purposeful end, all united and illuminated (in the best of lives) by that ﬁnal purpose. To develop our students ethically, we have to engage this moral imagination, and there is no more natural way to do so than with the aid of story.

4.5. Using Imaginative Literature At the University of Dallas, instead of using a standard textbook in the Business Ethics course, readings are assigned in imaginative literature. Lectures and selected articles provide the skeleton framework that helps organize ethical thinking but which does not form a kind of calculus for ethical solutions. The stories are then discussed in a seminar-like setting in which the lessons to be learned are drawn out by an empathetic engagement with the characters of the story.

4.5.1.

An Example of a Useful Story

An example of a useful story is Power in Trust, a short story by Auchincloss (1963; see Appendix for full citation). It is a story of the managing partner of a Manhattan law ﬁrm who has a noble view of the proper function of a law ﬁrm, a vision toward which he tries to lead the ﬁrm. But one partner is entirely of another view, believing that the ﬁrm exists simply to make as much money as possible, whether the cases they take are just causes or not, and not scrupling about tactics. Further, he is the leader of an incipient rebellion against the leadership of the managing partner. A small incident convinces the managing partner that he must ﬁnd some way to be rid of his maverick partner, or give up his vision for the ﬁrm. Something novel is called for, as a member of a partnership cannot simply be ﬁred, and can be forced out only by agreement of at least a simple majority of the partners. The maverick partner takes a case that has no merit and that attacks, on the grounds of mental incapacity in the testator, the will of an industrialist who was a friend of the managing partner. The widow inherits half the estate, the other half going to a charitable foundation founded by the decedent. The plaintiff of record is a disreputable and troublesome sister of the decedent. The managing partner is clear that the decedent deliberately

Encouraging Moral Engagement

83

cut her out of his will for good reason. The maverick does not disagree and he makes a bet with the managing partner that he will gain a settlement of at least half a million dollars, or resign from the ﬁrm. The foundation, seeing that settling the suit for a goodly amount of money will be cheaper than defending it, offers a settlement. The widow is distressed because, although the foundation will bear the cost, she considers that the suit is an attack on her late husband’s character. She appeals to her friend, the managing partner, who coaches her to send a letter to the foundation threatening to cut them out of her will if they settle the suit. With the settlement offer off the table, the suit goes to trial and is dismissed. An appeal is unanimously rejected by both the appellate and the supreme courts. The maverick partner resigns, leaving the managing partner free to lead his ﬁrm to his noble vision.

4.5.2.

An Ethical Analysis of the Story

The common response of students to this story is that the managing partner was grossly unethical in violating the canon of the law that prohibits counsel from aiding an adversarial party. Although the maverick is the lead counsel, the canon binds the entire ﬁrm. But then some may say, and the instructor can encourage this, that, after all, legal justice has been served. The complete failure of the suit in the courts shows that the managing partner has caused justice to be worked, and the purpose of the canons of the law is exactly that, to see to it that justice is not frustrated. The technical philosophy applicable to this situation is taken from Aquinas’ Treatise on Law. In brief, the law is framed for the common good, but is in its nature general; it cannot ﬁt with perfect correctness every situation that may arise. Accordingly, the function of the judge is to modify or set aside the law in those instances where it will not reach the result intended by the legislator, without vacating the law. Efﬁciency is the goal of the foundation, but not of the widow, who seeks strict justice. In this instance, the managing partner sets aside a rule (not a statute) that would, were it applied strictly in this case, keep justice from being done. But justice for the widow is not the intention of the managing partner, who is ﬁxed on getting rid of his partner. The discussion inevitably gets into the question of whether it is good for the maverick partner to leave the ﬁrm, and whether it is good in the managing partner to seek that result. If it is good, on the grounds that a moral cancer has to be excised, then the fact that the managing partner was not aiming for the justice sought by the widow does not affect the moral quality of his act. Some students will remain unconvinced, but few, if any, are sympathetic to the maverick, and others enter into empathy with both the widow and the managing partner. They can feel the widow’s distress, and imagine themselves in the managing partner’s position. At the same time, the instructor must bring forward the critical point that, granted that the legislator would want this particular rule set aside in this particular case, that can be done only by a judge properly authorized to do so by the legislator, a judge who is learned in the intentions of the legislator. The question then is: by what authority does the managing partner imagine himself entitled to be the judge who does that?

84

Louis C. Gasper

The point of the story and its consideration is not so much to decide whether one or the other character was right or wrong, but to enter into the thinking of the characters, into their passions and attachments and so engage the student’s moral imagination. In this way, the student can apprehend the difﬁculty encountered by a person who ought to question the soundness of his/her objective when it is driven by a motivation that may well be simple spite. The emotional attachment shown by the managing partner, the emotional appeal by the widow, and the crassness of his partner’s behavior, all conspire to cloud the ethical way forward. Part of the point is to demonstrate to the student, and get the student to feel, that there is tragedy in life, that though our ethical principles are pretty much black and white the situations in which we ﬁnd ourselves often enough make application of those principles a study in half-lights and grays. The partner who takes the case is explicitly engaging in a variety of extortion that happens to have no express law against it. On the other hand, preventing that extortion requires violation of a solemn obligation by the managing partner. No entirely happy ending is possible. The partner who lost the case is crushed, the managing partner’s rule is consolidated, but the student must ponder whether the result is a better character in either of those persons. The ﬁrm is presumably now committed to the managing partner’s nobility of vision, but the student must be brought to consider whether it is likely that the ﬁrm will behave better once its managing partner, albeit to attain a good, has set aside a rule over which even he admitted he had no authority. If general respect for the canons of legal practice have been diminished by the managing partner’s act, the student must question whether the greater good has been served, despite the prevention of this extortion and perhaps others that would otherwise have been undertaken in the absence of the managing partner’s making an example of the partner who tried it this time. By enmeshing the ethical facts and issues in a context-rich narrative, the story induces the student to ‘‘suspension of disbelief’’ and consequently an engagement of the moral imagination, whether by attraction or revulsion to the characters and their doings. The principles and values involved are imprinted more easily and deeply by the story than they could be by textbooks and cases that ‘‘objectify’’ the characters and issues and thus detach them from the student. Again, the point is not to ﬁnd a happy solution — none is available — but to bring the student to feel the difﬁculties that must be overcome in ethically challenging situations, and to appreciate what is involved in dealing with passions before he/she must himself work through a serious ethical challenge in his/her business life, a situation he/she will not be able to detach from as if it were a case or a textbook example.

4.6. What the Teacher must bring to the Course This method of teaching business ethics is not without its rigors for the instructor. The teacher has to have a good breadth of acquaintance with imaginative literature and a certain minimum of skill and practice in reading stories for this purpose. This is not gained quickly. Students can be guided to stimulate and exercise their imaginations only by a teacher who brings to the course a certain amount of artistic (literary) imagination in addition to a well-formed moral imagination.

Encouraging Moral Engagement

85

Along with imagination, the teacher also has to help the students structure their ethical thinking in some systematic way. Otherwise, the discussion tends to descend rapidly to what each student ‘‘feels’’ is right. In other words, emotions and passions can rule. Because there is an emphasis on character, the ethical ‘‘theory’’ that is best suited to this literary approach is Aristotelian virtue. The various theories of ethics can be divided, somewhat arbitrarily, into three kinds. Many theories are deontological, relying on the duty to conform to right rules, an approach developed to a high level by Kant (1964). The alternative to deontological ethics is a teleological ethics, such as utilitarianism, that justiﬁes acts by the consequences they bring. Virtue ethics, fathered by Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, is a further alternative that proposes that neither rules nor consequences are adequate in themselves to determine the goodness of an act. Academic business ethics programs tended to follow the theory of ethics that was dominant in the philosophy departments in the 1970s, which was Kantian. Since then, however, virtue ethics has enjoyed a resurgence and while not dominant is very much alive in philosophy departments. It has the advantage of focusing ﬁrst on character, on the strengths of character that enable one to attain ‘‘the good life.’’ Instruction requires that the teacher set forth the true nature of virtue as a settled disposition to choose rightly (calling it ‘‘a good habit’’ is misleading at best) and the foundations for the four ‘‘cardinal’’ virtues. A brief synopsis here of virtue theory may be useful. Virtue theory proceeds on a certain anthropological understanding, that insofar as we are concerned with inﬂuences on behavior the human being is distinguished as being a rational and social animal. In its functioning in relation to the world, the human being experiences pain and pleasure as an animal, needs to function in relation to others on a continuing basis, and has the capacity for thinking and judgment. A person’s character consists of the strengths and weaknesses that he/she brings to dealing with these inﬂuences, which often present themselves as emotions. To prevent being ruled by emotion, the person needs strength to deal with pain, to act rightly when fearful. He/she must also rule his/her pleasures so that they take their proper place in his/her life. He/she must also have the strength to control his/ her natural egoism and selﬁshness so as to live well in society with others, and he/she must have the strength to have sound judgment and bring it to bear on the practicalities of life. The English names usually given to these strengths are, respectively, fortitude, temperance, justice, and prudence. Applying the virtues requires a (theoretical) framework that allows analysis of the ethical act. The one that seems best suited to a virtue orientation is that which distinguishes three principal factors. The ﬁrst is the end, the consequence that the person intends to bring about by his/her choice. The second is the immediate concrete action that is contemplated in the choice, and the third is the totality of all the circumstances that may impinge on the quality of the act. This is not a deontological framework, as it takes account of rules as a circumstance, not as the principal determinants of what is to be done. Similarly, consequences are circumstantial, not simply dispositive of the ethical problem. Virtue ethics is able to rise above what otherwise is a quandary between deontological and teleological ethical theories that shuttles fruitlessly between rules and consequences as ﬁnally determinative of what is right or wrong.

86

Louis C. Gasper

4.7. A Course using Imaginative Literature The Business Ethics course in the Graduate School of Management at the University of Dallas requires that the student read two literary works for every class meeting (the meetings are 3.5 h long). Examples of some of the stories are given in the Appendix. The student is expected to have read the selection with care before the class begins, and a brief quiz on the content of each reading imposes a penalty for anyone who does not meet that expectation. As a rule, each reading is discussed separately. Each student is required to respond to the reading, identifying the principal ethical issue(s) involved, analyzing the decisions of the characters, and explaining why the decisions were right or wrong, and what might have been done differently and why. This provokes a general discussion in which different ideas are hashed out. Students are encouraged to bring to the discussion parallels in actual situations they know of, or have experienced, that support the points they make. The part of the instructor is to provide his/her own parallels, to guide this discussion as needed to expose the principles that are latent in the story, and encourage an empathy with the characters that will build the habit of empathy with others in real life. The instructor also lectures, albeit not at great length or in great detail, on philosophical structures or principles that can illuminate the ethical issues and enable the student to analyze them with greater facility. Sometimes background has to be supplied, such as requirements found in professional codes of conduct that may bear on the story. Every class session includes discussion of a case that the student has not been given in advance and therefore cannot prepare. The cases present the kinds of everyday decisions that the ordinary manager must make, not policy decisions but the resolution of ethical dilemmas. This is useful in demonstrating principles recognized in the stories and applying them to new and unfamiliar and indeed sudden situations, just as a manager so often must. A term paper is also required, focusing on a contemporary ethical challenge faced by an executive or a company. The bare essence of the case is proposed and the student is required to research the events, persons, and circumstances thoroughly and carry out the kind of analysis, but with more extended attention, that is given to the cases proposed in the class sessions. No examinations are given, as the quiz scores and a tally of the number and quality of interventions in the discussions are adequate grading points.

4.8. Conclusion Instructors in business ethics ought to give serious consideration to this teaching method. Besides stimulating the development of the moral imagination, an additional beneﬁt to using stories is that the student has a refreshing change of pace from the methods used in other courses. Further, if they have not done so before — and in a distressing proportion of cases, they have not — the students are introduced

Encouraging Moral Engagement

87

to imaginative literature, an aspect of our culture that is critical for becoming a genuinely educated person. Teaching from imaginative literature does not necessarily require more effort than do other methods, but it does require a reorientation not only from the didactic methods suited to other subjects but also from the most common mode of thinking in business. There is real work to be done if one has not read widely. Not every story is suitable for teaching business ethics, so ﬁnding fresh material requires reading a good deal more than what will be assigned. Yet the beneﬁt of making a much greater impact on the subsequent behavior of our students is great. Moreover, the instructor is never injured or left without personal reward by entering more extensively and deeply into the moral imaginations of competent writers, and into what ﬁnally is the moral imagination of our culture and our civilization.

Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank the anonymous referees of this chapter for their many valuable suggestions. He is greatly indebted to them.

References Auchincloss, L. (1963). Power in trust. In: Powers of attorney. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifﬂin. Bartlett, F. C. (1928). Types of imagination. Journal of Philosophical Studies, 3, 78–85. Blish, J. (2000). A case of conscience. New York, NY: Del Rey. Block, L. (1999). Keller’s choice. In: Hit man. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Bolt, R. (1990). A man for all seasons. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Carrier, D. (1973). Three kinds of imagination. The Journal of Philosophy, 70, 819–831. Christie, A. (1984). The Augean stables. In: The labors of Hercules. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Coles, R. (1989). The call of stories. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifﬂin. Conrad, J. (1969). The secret sharer. In: Heart of darkness and the secret sharer. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Crane, S. (1977). The blue hotel. In: The portable Stephen Crane. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Eliot, T. S. (1952). Murder in the cathedral. In: T. S. Eliot: The complete poems and plays 1909–1950. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifﬂin Harcourt. Faulkner, W. (1999). Lo! In: The collected stories of William Faulkner. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Ibsen, H. (1977). An enemy of the people. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Ishiguro, K. (1993). Salisbury. In: The remains of the day. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Joyce, J. (2011). A mother. In: Dubliners. Hollywood, FL: Simon & Brown. Kant, I. (1964). Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals (H. J. Paton, Trans.). New York, NY: Harper Books. Kesey, K. (1999). One ﬂew over the cuckoo’s nest (Part one). New York, NY: Penguin Books.

88

Louis C. Gasper

Kind, A. (2005). Imagery and imagination. In: Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at http://www.iep.utm.edu/imagery/. Mangan, K. (2010, September 15). Texas A&M’s bottom-line ratings of professors ﬁnd that most are cost-effective. In: The chronicle of higher education. Available at http:// chronicle.com/article/Texas-A-Ms-Bottom-Line/124451/. McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterﬁeld, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219–232. McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterﬁeld, K. D. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 55, 295–305. Miller, H. (1996). Death of a salesman. New York, NY: Penguin Books. O’Connor, F. (1971). The displaced person. In: Flannery O’Connor: The complete stories. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Peirce, C. (1931). The scientiﬁc imagination. In: C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce Vol I: Principles of philosophy. Retrieved from http:// www.textlog.de/4231.html. Ribot, T. (1903). The heredity of imagination. In: T. Ribot (Ed.), Heredity: A psychological study of its phenomena, laws, causes, and consequences (pp. 54–55). New York, NY: Appleton & Co. Shaw, G. B. (1956). Saint Joan. In: Bernard Shaw’s Saint Joan, Major Barbara, Androcles and the lion. New York, NY: Modern Library. Sophocles. Antigone (E. H. Plumptre, Trans., revised Louis C. Gasper) (private publication). Tan, A. (1991). The red candle. In: The Joy Luck Club. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Wilson, S. (1955). The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Appendix. Some Works used by the Author in His Business Ethics Course See Blish (2000), Bolt (1990), Joyce (2011), Ibsen (1977), Sophocles (private publication), Auchincloss (1963), Miller (1996), Block (1999), Faulkner (1999), Eliot (1952), Shaw (1956), Ishiguro (1993), Kesey (1999, chapter 5), Wilson (1955, chapters 11–14 and 26), Christie (1984), Crane (1977), O’Connor (1971), Tan (1991), and Conrad (1969).

Chapter 5

Fostering Integrity in Business Education: An Analysis of Academic Administrators’ Perceptions at Spanish Business Schools Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez, J. Alberto Arago´n-Correa and Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres

Abstract Purpose — The central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the importance of management students acquiring abilities related to integrity, which can be used in the subsequent lives as managers, it is crucial to specify ways to integrate such abilities into management education. Methodology — We performed an exploratory empirical analysis about the situation of Spanish business schools, with a special focus on university administrators’ perceptions about several university groups (i.e., students, faculty, and governmental team at the university). Findings — We conclude that the weight of business ethics, compared to the remaining disciplines taught at business schools, is the lowest, while the faculty employed in this ﬁeld is also marginal. Results reveal that groups perceived as having the highest levels of integrity by both heads of department and deans do not necessarily coincide with the university groups that are perceived as having the greatest inﬂuence to incorporate changes in management education at business schools. Implications — Our results may also be useful for regulators and university managers to understand how certain policies and measures may inﬂuence the achievement of higher levels of integrity in management education at university institutions.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

90

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al. Originality of the chapter — The originality of this chapter relies on addressing the central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the courses offered, which has not been previously studied. Additionally, the analysis of academic administrators’ perceptions provides an original viewpoint to the issue.

5.1. Introduction Recent corporate scandals have led to a growing realization that integrity and business are very closely connected. Integrity is of particular importance for businesses facing employee fraud and other forms of unethical activity as well as for societies in general. For instance, the annual cost of business crime in the United States is about a trillion dollars (ACFE, 2008). This realization is leading employers to demand that business schools, as providers of education and training to managers and senior executives, train their students in ethics and social responsibility (Wankel, 2010). Nonetheless, recent management literature has suggested that, as MBA programs proliferate, the emphasis on integrating ethics education into graduate business curricula is decreasing (Wankel, 2010). Our second section shows that this tendency is also observed at any level of business programs, that is, bachelor, MBA, specialized master, and doctoral. The term ethics refers to rules and principles that deﬁne right and wrong conduct, and managers make their decisions based on ethical principles (Robbins & Coulter, 2002). Thus, business education for integrity is aimed at training students to identify what behaviors and decisions to take in their subsequent lives as managers. Several universities concerned with ethical and moral issues have developed heterogeneous initiatives with respect to the inclusion of integrity into business curricula. Some of these cases have been reported in the literature (e.g., Aquino, Freeman, Reed, Lim, & Felps, 2009; Vega, 2007; Zgheib, 2005). Furthermore, beyond the experiences carried out by university institutions, the accrediting body for business schools, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), has updated its ethics standards for business schools (Kennedy & Horn, 2007). The Ethics Education Task Force (EETF) has created an accreditation requirement for the presence of ethics education within the MBA curriculum (Phillips, 2004), and business scholars have advocated the importance of giving increased emphasis to moral standards for their students as ‘‘a way out of the morass’’ (Locke, 2006, p. 324). However, the central question of how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the courses offered remains basically unexplored. Given the importance of management students acquiring abilities related to integrity, which can be used in the subsequent lives as managers, it is crucial to specify ways to integrate such abilities into management education. To achieve this aim, this chapter is divided into three different sections following this section. The second section contains a brief theoretical review about the models proposed in the literature aimed at fostering the implementation of higher levels of

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

91

integrity into management education. In the third section, we explore how these ideas may be conducted at business schools to promote future integrity-based behaviors in management students, and we review the most recent empirical literature about integrity in management education. In the fourth section, we perform an empirical analysis about the situation at Spanish business schools. Finally, the ﬁfth section provides the main conclusions drawn from the chapter.

5.2. Fostering Integrity at Business Schools: Theoretical Review Literature analyzing the implementation of integrity in management education includes studies on students’ engagement in some form of cheating or questionable behavior at business schools (McCabe, Butterﬁeld, & Trevin˜o, 2006), ethics standards for business schools (Kennedy & Horn, 2007), the adoption of honor codes (McCabe, Butterﬁeld, & Trevin˜o, 2003), and the role of students’ perceptions in academic misconduct (Kennedy, Bisping, Patron, & Roskelley, 2008). There is a huge array of possibilities for incorporating integrity contents and practices into management curricula. These possibilities are diverse and cover the existence of one or more speciﬁc topics within a course, specialized courses, or even specialized programs for integrity-based management. Nonetheless, while prior works have stressed that integrity must be inherent to academic culture at business schools (Caldwell, 2010), the perception that business schools’ curricula still do not adequately cover ethics is widespread even among leaders of business schools (Nicholson & DeMoss, 2009). Recent studies have addressed how integrity and moral conduct may be implemented in business schools (Caldwell, 2010) for future managers (i.e., current business students) to acquire the abilities to run their businesses in accordance with integrity principle. A study by Pfeffer (1998) claims that an incremental approach is often less effective than a systemic and holistic effort. Pfeffer supports the idea of integration rather than separate and isolated initiatives. This ﬁnding seems to contradict the evidence existing at many universities, where the emphasis has been put on the development of separate courses focusing on guidelines for ethical behavior.

5.2.1.

Caldwell’s Model for Academic Integrity

Moreover, several studies have presented different initiatives to incorporate integrity into management education (e.g., Cornelius, Wallace, & Tassabehji, 2007; McCabe et al., 2006). Caldwell (2010) proposes a 10-step model for academic integrity, whose underlying idea is the involvement of all the participants (i.e., students, faculty, and administrators) in order to create an integrated and aligned culture based on integrity (Dufresne, 2004). The ﬁrst step consists of the ‘‘articulation of a clear purpose and mission,’’ that is, establishing clear objectives and commitment for an academic

92

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

integrity program, as foundations of a successful ethics initiative (Procario-Foley & Bean, 2002). The second step involves the ‘‘orientation and training of faculty.’’ Caldwell proposes that, since faculty are trained on and familiar with the academic research literature, faculty training may be mostly carried out through copies of articles, PowerPoint summaries, and well-crafted written materials. Later, the information contained in such documents may be discussed in a formal meeting. The ﬁve fundamental values of academic integrity, that is, honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility, must be incorporated into the creation of a successful program to promote a culture that discourages academic dishonesty (Caldwell, 2010, p. 5). ‘‘Explanation and clariﬁcation of current policies’’ constitutes the third step. Students are often confused about what constitutes unethical behavior. Thus, faculty and administrators play a key role in clarifying an ethics program to students, as well as in explaining how students’ behavior will be monitored. Kennedy et al. (2008) also conﬁrm the importance of being clear with students about what constitutes inappropriate conduct, and establishing control systems in the classroom that demonstrate that inappropriate conduct would be discovered and penalized. The fourth step, ‘‘implementation of a realistic process for addressing violations,’’ implies that both an academic honesty policy and an enforcement process are crucial for discouraging academic dishonesty as well as to punish it when it occurs. The ﬁfth step is called ‘‘attainment of student ownership.’’ Since many undergraduate and graduate business programs involve international students having different attitudes than home students about cheating (Flynn, 2003), it is important that university institutions clearly specify what they expect from academic integrity, and how these international students should adjust to this ethical code. ‘‘Empowerment of students in education and enforcement’’ reﬂects the sixth step of the model proposed by Caldwell (2010). At this stage, several aspects are useful for educating students and reinforcing academic integrity policies, such as the existence of honor codes, students’ identiﬁcation with a university’s institutions, and belonging to a moral community. The seventh step is the ‘‘maintenance of dialogue with stakeholders.’’ It is necessary to achieve a shared commitment from faculty, administrator, business community, and students in order to keep an effective integrity program (Havnes, 2004; Leonard & LaBrasseur, 2008). The eighth step comprises the ‘‘reﬁnement of the ethics curriculum.’’ Despite a great debate against, a growing body of evidence supports the idea that moral awareness can be learned and ethical decision making can be improved by training in business ethics (Ritter, 2006). Caldwell (2010) stresses the idea that business curricula need to be constantly updated, and grounded in the application of moral principles in order to have an impact on students’ behavior (Trevin˜o & McCabe, 1994). The ninth step relies on ‘‘monitored enforcement and documentation of results.’’ Several scholars have pointed out this step as crucial for an effective implementation and follow-through (Kotter, 1996; Pfeffer, 1998). Many students blame faculty for failing to monitor obvious cheating and for failing to penalize students who cheat (Levy & Rakovski, 2006).

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

93

Finally, the last step consists of an ‘‘evaluation of outcomes and communication of results’’. Both elements constitute important aspects to develop a sustainable culture. Once these results are communicated to faculty, students, and administrators, these groups can carry out additional efforts to reﬁne the integrity program implemented at the institution. Despite its great degree of complexity, it is important to note that this model does not necessarily have to be fully implemented, but is rather intended to serve for each university institution to select the elements of the model that better apply to its circumstances. After having reviewed the most recent theoretical proposals, in the next section we explore some initiatives implemented to foster integrity in business education.

5.3. Implementing Integrity-Based Experiences at Business Schools: Empirical Review Business schools are increasingly leading the incorporation of integrity-related topics into management education, addressing both theoretical and pedagogical perspectives. A traditional business program, that is, bachelor, master, specialized master, or doctoral, is usually focused on training students about how to maximize proﬁts in their future businesses. Thus, these courses pay extensive attention to areas such as ﬁnance, accounting, and economic theory. As a consequence, aspects of ethics and integrity topics are left behind in some sense, and just occupy a marginal part of the training.

5.3.1.

Business Ethics at Business Schools: Number of Programs and Full-Time Faculty

Several schools have already implemented business programs on business ethics all over the world, though the presence of this ﬁeld is still far from reaching the levels of other disciplines more traditional within management. To illustrate our arguments, Table 5.1 gathers the percentage of schools offering at least one degree program in each ﬁeld/discipline all over the world for the year 2008/2009, with data extracted from AACSB International. While many international business, corporate governance, and accounting and accountability courses include ethics as part of their course, we can perceive the limited number of ethics programs. Among the four categories of business programs, that is, bachelor, MBA, specialized master, and doctoral, we observe that the ﬁeld of business ethics is given less importance than other aspects of the business curriculum. Moreover, these results can be analyzed by types of business program. First, in the category of bachelor program, business schools provide no bachelor degree on business ethics for the year 2008/2009. Second, just 1% out of the 604 business schools reporting MBA programs is devoted to business ethics, while other ﬁelds such as general business or management receive attention from 69.5% and 34.9% of the business schools, respectively. Third, in the

94

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

Table 5.1: Percentage of business schools offering at least one degree program in each ﬁeld/discipline (2008/2009). Field/discipline

Accounting Behavioral science/organizational behavior Business communication Business education Business ethics Business law/legal environment Computer information systems (CIS)/ management information systems (MIS) E-business (includes e-commerce) Economics/managerial economics Entrepreneurship/small business administration Finance (includes banking) General business Health services/hospital administration Hotel/restaurant/tourism Human resource management (includes personnel and industry/labor relations) Insurance International business Management Marketing Operations research Production/operations management Public administration Quantitative methods Real estate Statistics Strategic management Supply chain management/ transportation/logistics Taxation Other Number of schools reporting Source: Self-elaboration from AACSB International.

Specialized Bachelor’s

MBA

78.3 0.8

14.9 2.0

65.0 2.7

33.9 14.8

1.3 4.1 0 4.1 53.1

0.5 0.3 1.0 2.3 18.2

1.7 1.5 0.2 1.7 27.9

0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 27.1

3.8 43.9 21.1

3.6 4.5 10.4

2.4 18.0 3.9

0.4 21.2 2.1

69.8 50.4 2.0 6.8 24.0

24.5 69.5 11.3 1.5 8.3

35.4 10.9 5.3 3.2 14.8

39.8 22.9 0.0 0.8 5.5

7.0 39.5 68.2 70.3 0.8 14.9 1.2 1.2 10.0 1.7 1.2 10.9

1.0 20.2 34.9 19.9 1.0 6.5 1.5 1.0 4.1 0.2 6.0 6.0

1.5 13.3 21.4 18.4 1.5 4.6 3.4 32 5.6 2.7 2.2 7.8

2.1 5.9 36.0 33.9 4.2 15.3 1.3 4.2 2.5 3.0 12.7 4.7

0.7 27.0

2.3 17.9

15.5 25.7

0.0 19.5

603

604

Master’s Doctoral

412

236

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

95

category of specialized masters, business ethics has the lowest representation (0.2%). Finally, only 0.4% of the business schools offer a doctoral program in business ethics. By adding all these results, we can conclude that, at an aggregate level, business ethics constitutes the least represented ﬁeld in business school programs during the academic course 2008/2009. Beyond analyzing the prevalence of programs focused on business ethics at business schools, it is also important to observe the full-time faculty employed in the ﬁeld of business ethics at business schools during the year 2009/2010. Table 5.2 reports this information, elaborated with data from the Salary Survey carried out at AACSB International. The second and third columns gather the data for the United States, while the fourth and ﬁfth columns represent the information for the rest of the world. Several conclusions can be drawn. First, while in Table 5.1 we saw that business ethics programs are the least represented, Table 5.2 shows that for the United States, the number of full-time faculty in this ﬁeld (112) is greater than in other ﬁelds such as business education (77), e-business (30), health services/hospital administration (89), and public administration (93). Second, the same relationship is drawn for the rest of the world but with greater intensity, since the number of full-time equivalents in business ethics (29) surpasses the number of full-time faculty in several other areas such as business communication (28), business education (2), e-business (17), health services/hospital administration (4), hotel/restaurant/tourism (21), insurance (10), public administration (19), real estate (17), and taxation (24). Third, if we look at the percentages comparison, then twice the number of full-time faculty is devoted to business ethics in the rest of the world as compared to the United States.

5.3.2.

Teaching of Business Ethics: Alternatives Proposed in the Literature

The teaching of business ethics has been addressed by a variety of studies (Bean & Bernardi, 2007; Beauvais, Desplaces, Melchar, & Bosco, 2007; Gonin, 2007; Poff, 2007), with scholars (Boyle, 2007) and practitioners (Krehmeyer, 2007) debating the most effective approach to inﬂuencing behaviors about moral conduct. Vega (2007) states that one solution has been to put an ethical component in each business course as suggested by the AACSB. However, these courses are taught by faculty who may themselves be untutored in ethical frameworks and philosophical foundations (p. 650), which seems a potentially weak method of getting the message across to undergraduate business students (Hartman & Hartman, 2004). Henceforth, she proposes the appropriateness of metaprojects as useful means to train business students in the ﬁeld of ethics. Recent analyses have also addressed the extent of use of ethics in managerial ethical decision making through a classroom laboratory experiment developed at the American University of Beirut (Zgheib, 2005). Zgheib distinguishes among the three principles of ethics, that is, utility, morality, and justice. The author concludes that morality is the overriding ethical principle used in managerial decision making,

96

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

Table 5.2: Full-time business faculty by ﬁeld/discipline (2009/2010). Field/discipline

United States

Rest of the world

Number Percentage Number Percentage Accounting Behavioral science/organizational behavior Business communication Business education Business ethics Business law/legal environment Computer information systems (CIS)/ management information systems (MIS) E-business (including e-commerce) Economics/managerial economics Entrepreneurship/small business administration Finance (includes banking) General business Health services/hospital administration Hotel/restaurant/tourism Human resource management (includes personnel and industry/ labor relations) Insurance International business Management Marketing Operations research Production/operations management Public administration Quantitative methods Real estate Statistics Strategic management Supply chain management/ transportation/logistics Taxation Other

4626 810

16.7 2.9

401 136

11.7 4.0

379 77 112 333 2552

1.4 0.3 0.4 3.0 9.2

28 2 29 72 185

0.8 0.1 0.8 2.1 5.4

30 2668 434

0.1 9.6 1.6

17 386 52

0.5 11.3 1.5

3669 148 89 170 541

13.3 0.5 0.3 0.6 2.0

383 75 4 21 151

11.1 2.2 0.1 0.6 4.4

131 347 2713 3597 169 1.061 93 382 178 317 887 309

0.5 1.3 9.8 13.0 0.7 3.8 0.3 1.4 0.6 1.1 3.2 1.1

10 60 316 429 67 115 19 61 17 63 184 44

0.3 1.7 9.2 12.5 2.0 3.3 0.6 1.8 0.5 1.8 5.4 1.3

0.7 0.6

24 79

0.7 2.3

182 172

Source: Self-elaboration from AACSB International — Salary Survey.

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

97

business students still believe in the justice system despite the weakness of the country’s law, and utility is the least used principle in decision making. Aquino et al. (2009) introduce a social-cognitive model of moral behavior for examining the joint inﬂuence of situational factors and the centrality of moral identity on moral intentions and behaviors. The study shows that the presence of a ﬁnancial incentive for performing well during a negotiation increased the accessibility of achievement-oriented facets of identity and decreased the accessibility of moral identity, especially for those for whom moral identity had relatively higher centrality. Consequently, intentions to lie increased (p. 132). Finally, in more general terms, Wankel (2010) proposes seven practical rules to help faculty readjust students’ mindsets and behavioral habits: (1) ‘‘know yourself,’’ (2) ‘‘start small,’’ (3) ‘‘have an escape plan,’’ (4) ‘‘send strong signals,’’ (5) ‘‘recognize the other person’s dilemma,’’ (6) ‘‘look at roles as well as people,’’ and ﬁnally (7) ‘‘remain vigilant and always question.’’ These rules are focused on helping students evaluate whether the counterpart is worthy of trust and displaying trustworthy behaviors, as foundations of future successful businesses. While this section shows an investigation about how and why universities decide to promote integrity through the courses, the following section provides an empirical analysis, based on two samples of Spanish academic administrators (i.e., deans and heads of department), about how universities decide.

5.4. Integrity at Spanish Business Schools: Academic Administrators’ Perceptions The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) is aimed at achieving a homogeneous system of university institutions. Thus, the so-called Bologna process constitutes an opportunity for higher education institutions to redeﬁne and update university curricula, including aspects of business ethics as key knowledge within student education. The EHEA will involve substantial changes in the syllabuses, the emergence, deletions, and/or fusion of careers, as well as conceptual and methodological reformulations. In this context, business schools are called to create a comprehensive cultural change to implement successfully an effective ethics program. Prior studies have also stressed that integrity must be inherent to academic culture at business schools (Caldwell, 2010), and to achieve that aim in business curricula, university departments and deans play a key role. The EETF stresses the importance of ethical culture, conduct, and climate of business schools to students’ tacit awareness and understanding of the importance and consequences of ethical behavior (Cornelius et al., 2007). Creating an organizational culture that is perceived as ethical and congruent requires communicating values in a clear manner and modeling behavior by organizational leaders (Schein, 2003). More speciﬁcally, we agree with Schein (2003), who claimed that organizations are most effective in achieving results when their cultures reﬂect alignment between the actions, espoused

98

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

beliefs, and core assumptions of leaders. For this reason, in this section we investigate management educators’ perceptions about several university groups. Some prior studies have dealt with the inﬂuence of perceptions on the integration of an ethics program (e.g., McCabe et al., 2006; McCabe & Trevin˜o, 1993; McCabe, Trevin˜o, & Butterﬁeld, 2002; Zimny, Robertson, & Bartoszek, 2008). For instance, early research by McCabe and Trevin˜o (1993) found that several factors associated with student perception were important in affecting the likelihood of students engaging in academic dishonesty, including student perceptions about (1) peer behavior, (2) faculty understanding and acceptance of policies about academic integrity, (3) the overall effectiveness of these policies, and (4) the severity of the penalties imposed on those who cheated. Why the focus on educators’ perceptions about integrity? While the theoretical background addresses how and why universities decide to foster integrity through the courses, the empirical section focuses on how universities decide about: Which groups are interested in fostering integrity, and Which groups have inﬂuence on fostering integrity. We will illustrate our arguments by showing data from our own surveys of heads of department and deans of university schools, both with management teaching assignments. It is important to note that department managers in Spain are largely responsible for the speciﬁc syllabus and orientation of the courses, whereas other administrators (e.g., deans) play a broader role, coordinating departments and school management, and serve as symbolic representatives. Our analysis provides interesting insights about two main aspects. First, we address department heads’ and deans’ perceptions about the levels of integrity in each university group (i.e., faculty, students, and governmental team at the university). Second, we additionally investigate the inﬂuence of ability.

5.4.1.

Heads of Department’s Perceptions

The sample was obtained by means of a written questionnaire sent on three occasions by both regular mail and by email to the heads of the departments with the option to reply online or on paper. The total population that received the questionnaire comprised 224 heads of department from Spanish universities (a response rate of 42.41% of department heads surveyed). This rate of response can be considered as highly satisfactory in comparison with the usual response rates in these studies. Furthermore, no signiﬁcant differences were found in the size of the universities that responded to the questionnaire. Additionally, no signiﬁcant differences were found in the replies to the questionnaire in the ﬁrst round in relation to the third round, or between online or postal replies. Speciﬁcally, we consider the following university groups for the sample of department heads: faculty, students, and the governmental team at the university.

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

99

5.4.1.1. Heads of department’s perceptions about integrity levels of university groups Figure 5.1 represents the heads of department’s average perceptions about integrity levels of university groups. Integrity involves an agent’s perception that another agent adheres to a set of principles that the former ﬁnds acceptable (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). To measure integrity, participants surveyed were asked to assess (by means of a Likert scale from 0 to 6) the interest of each of the following groups in the introduction or strengthening of new topics, contents, and practices in the courses. We can observe that the governmental team at the university is perceived as having the highest level of integrity. In contrast, heads of department perceive students as the university group with the lowest level of integrity. Additionally, several tests were conducted to prove the statistical signiﬁcance of these differences.

Heads of departments perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)

5.4.1.2. Heads of department’s perceptions about ability levels of university groups Figure 5.2 gathers the heads of department’s average perceptions about ability levels of university groups. Ability is that group of skills, competencies, and characteristics that enables a party to have inﬂuence within some speciﬁc domain (Mayer et al., 1995). Hence, in order to measure ability, participants were asked to assess (by means of a Likert scale from 0 to 6) the importance of each of the three groups in the decision-making processes of their department. It is interesting to note that, contrary to what was previously mentioned in Figure 5.1, students are perceived as having the lowest level of ability to effectively collaborate in the integration of new contents. Furthermore, faculty is highly ranked by heads of department, which means that this university group is perceived as owing the highest inﬂuential power to incorporate new content in business curricula. Moreover, these differences are statistically signiﬁcant, as reported by several tests conducted though not included in the chapter.

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 Faculty

Students

Governmental team at the University

University groups

Figure 5.1: Heads of department’s average perceptions about integrity levels of university groups

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al. Heads of department’s perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)

100

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 Faculty

Students

Governmental team at the University

University groups

Figure 5.2: Heads of department’s average perceptions about ability levels of university groups 5.4.2.

Deans’ Perceptions

We sent a written questionnaire to 164 deans of business schools and engineering education schools in 69 Spanish universities in order to learn their perceptions about several university groups. The sample was obtained by means of a written questionnaire sent on three occasions by both regular mail and email to the heads of the department, with the option to reply online or on paper. The ﬁnal sample comprised 74 deans of 46 different universities, all of them with management teaching assignments. In relation to deans, the same university groups are explored: faculty, students, and governmental team at the university. 5.4.2.1. Deans’ perceptions about integrity levels of university groups To complement the perceptions of department heads, we now turn to explore deans’ perceptions about integrity levels of university group. Figure 5.3 contains such information. In a scale ranging from 0 to 6, two groups — faculty and governmental team at the university — are rated with a score of 4. In other words, deans perceive such university groups as willing to cooperate effectively in the integration of new practices at business schools. Several tests were conducted to prove the statistical signiﬁcance of these differences. 5.4.2.2. Deans’ perceptions about ability levels of university groups Finally, Figure 5.4 represents deans’ average perceptions in relation to ability levels of university groups. In this case, the governmental team at the university is perceived by deans as being the most inﬂuential, in terms of ability, to effectively implement the integration of new practices at business schools, while students receive the lowest score. Finally, some tests show the statistical signiﬁcance of these differences.

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

101

Deans average perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 Faculty

Students

Governmental team at the University

University groups

Figure 5.3: Deans’ average perceptions about integrity levels of university groups

Deans average perceptions (Likert scale from 0 to 6)

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 Faculty

Students

Governmental team at the University

University groups

Figure 5.4: Deans’ average perceptions about ability levels of university groups

5.5. Conclusions Management education for integrity constitutes a crucial tool for alleviating the severe economic consequences of business fraud and corruption for society. Through mass media, the public has consistently learned about the far-reaching effects of corporate scandal in organizations such as Enron, Adelphia Communications, WorldCom, and Tyco International (cf., Merritt, 2004). In this context, business

102

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

schools have been signaled as sharing the blame for certain corporate scandals (Ghoshal, 2003). Furthermore, the beneﬁts of enhanced intellectual capital can be viewed on both a micro and a macro level with competitive advantage, as advocated by the resourcebased view of the ﬁrm, and improved economic growth (Ginzberg & Vojta, 1981) being prominent examples. In this chapter we investigate university administrators’ perceptions. After a theoretical review about the integration of ethics management at business schools, we explore the current situation of this ﬁeld all over the world. We conclude that the weight of business ethics, compared to the remaining disciplines taught at business schools, is the lowest, while the faculty employed in this ﬁeld is also marginal. Finally, we performed an exploratory empirical analysis about the situation of Spanish business schools, with a special focus on university administrators’ perceptions about several university groups (i.e., students, faculty, and governmental team at the university). Results reveal that groups perceived as having the highest levels of integrity by both heads of department and deans do not necessarily coincide with the university groups that are perceived as having the greatest inﬂuence to incorporate changes in management education at business schools. Moreover, several tests conducted additionally, though not included in the chapter, prove the signiﬁcance of the differences observed. Finally, our results may also be useful for regulators and university managers to understand how certain policies and measures may inﬂuence the achievement of higher levels of integrity in management education at university institutions.

Acknowledgments This research has been partially funded by grants from the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science through the projects ECO2010-20483 and the Andalusia Regional Government (Excellence Research Project P08-SEJ-0457 and Excellence Research Project SEJ-6765).

References Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., Lim, V. K. G., & Felps, W. (2009). Testing a socialcognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive inﬂuence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141. Association of Certiﬁed Fraud Examiners (ACFE). (2008). Report to the nations on occupational fraud and abuse. Available at http://www.acfe.com/rttn/2010-rttn.asp. Bean, D. F., & Bernardi, R. A. (2007). Ethics education in our colleges and universities: A positive role for accounting practitioners. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 59–76. Beauvais, L. L., Desplaces, D. E., Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2007). Business faculty perceptions and actions regarding ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 121–136.

Fostering Integrity in Business Education

103

Boyle, M. E. (2007). Learning to neighbor? Service-learning in context. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 85–104. Caldwell, C. (2010). A ten-step model for academic integrity: A positive approach for business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 1–13. Cornelius, N., Wallace, J., & Tassabehji, R. (2007). An analysis of corporate social responsibility, corporate identity and ethics teaching in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 117–135. Dufresne, R. L. (2004). An action learning perspective on effective implementation of academic honor codes. Group & Organization Management, 29(2), 201–218. Flynn, R. S. (2003). Confronting academic dishonesty in the accounting classroom: A cultural experience? Accounting Education, 12(4), 437–439. Ghoshal, S. (2003, July 18). Business schools share the blame for Enron. Financial Times. Ginzberg, E., & Vojta, G. (1981). The service sector of the U.S. economy. Scientiﬁc American, 244, 48–55. Gonin, M. (2007). Business research, self-fulﬁlling prophecy, and the inherent responsibility of scholars. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 33–58. Hartman, L. P., & Hartman, E. M. (2004). How to teach ethics: Assumptions and arguments. Journal of Business Ethics, 1(2), 165–212. Havnes, A. (2004). Examination and learning: An activity-theoretical analysis of the relationship between assessment and education practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(2), 159–176. Kennedy, M. J., & Horn, L. C. (2007). Thoughts on ethics education in the business school environment: An interview with Dr. Jerry Trapnell, AACSB. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 77–84. Kennedy, P., Bisping, T. O., Patron, H., & Roskelley, K. (2008). Modelling academic dishonesty: The role of student perceptions and misconduct type. Journal of Economic Education, 39(1), 4–21. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Krehmeyer, D. (2007, October 26). Teaching business ethics: A critical need. Business Week Online, p. 4. Leonard, V., & LaBrasseur, R. (2008). Individual assignments and academic dishonesty — Exploring the learning conundrum. Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 37–56. Levy, E. S., & Rakovski, C. C. (2006). A zero tolerance professor and student registration choices. Research in Higher Education, 47(6), 735–754. Locke, E. A. (2006). Business ethics: A way out of the morass. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 324–332. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734. McCabe, D. L., Butterﬁeld, K. D., & Trevin˜o, L. K. (2003). Faculty and academic integrity: The inﬂuence of current honor codes and past honor code experiences. Research in Higher Education, 44(3), 367–385. McCabe, D. L., Butterﬁeld, K. D., & Trevin˜o, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 294–305. McCabe, D. L., & Trevin˜o, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual inﬂuences. The Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 522–538. McCabe, D. L., Trevin˜o, L. K., & Butterﬁeld, K. D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual inﬂuences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modiﬁed honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 357–378.

104

Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez et al.

Merritt, J. (2004, October 18). Welcome to ethics 101. Businessweek. Available at http:// www.businessweek.com/bschools/04/partner/b3904435.htm. Nicholson, C. Y., & DeMoss, M. (2009). Teaching ethics and social responsibility: An evaluation of undergraduate business education at the discipline level. Journal of Education for Business, 84(4), 213–218. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building proﬁts by putting people ﬁrst. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Phillips, S. M. (Chair). (2004). Ethics education in business schools. Report of the Ethics Education Task Force to AACSB International Board of Directors, St. Louis, MO. Poff, D. C. (2007). Duties owed in serving students: The importance of teaching moral reasoning and theories of ethical leadership in educating business students. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5(1), 25–32. Procario-Foley, E. G., & Bean, D. F. (2002). Institutions of higher education: Cornerstones in building ethical organizations. Teaching Business Ethics, 6, 101–116. Ritter, B. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-making process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(2), 153–164. Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (Eds). (2002). Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Schein, E. H. (2003). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Trevin˜o, L. K., & McCabe, D. (1994). Meta-learning about business ethics: Building honorable business school communities. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(6), 405–416. Vega, G. (2007). Teaching business ethics through service learning metaprojects. Journal of Management Education, 31(5), 647–678. Wankel, C. (2010). Orienting business students to navigate the shoals of corruption in practice. In: A. Stachowicz-Stanusch (Ed.), Organizational immunity to corruption: Building theoretical and research foundations (pp. 53–68). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Zgheib, P. W. (2005). Managerial ethics: An empirical study of business students in the American University of Beirut. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 69–78. Zimny, S. T., Robertson, D. U., & Bartoszek, T. (2008). Academic and personal dishonesty in college students. North American Journal of Psychology, 10(2), 291–312.

PART III VALUES AS PATHWAYS TO ETHICAL ACTION

Chapter 6

Teaching ‘‘How’’ — Not ‘‘Whether’’ — to Manage with Integrity: Undergraduate and MBA Applications of the ‘‘Giving Voice to Values’’ Curriculum Christopher P. Adkins, Mary C. Gentile, Cynthia Ingols and Sˇpela Trefalt

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of the chapter is to introduce educators to the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) approach to values-driven leadership development and to illustrate its ﬂexibility and usefulness in several business education contexts. Methodology/approach – The chapter’s introduction provides a rationale for and general description of the GVV curriculum. GVV’s contributions to traditional Business Ethics education are differentiated and explained. The current use and availability of the curriculum are brieﬂy outlined. Two case examples of GVV’s use follow, one designed for undergraduate business students and another for MBA students. Through these cases, readers see the curriculum’s key aspects: the foundational frameworks; the use of selfassessment; and the scripting exercises. They see how the curriculum can be adapted for a single course as well as used as a framework for integration across the core curriculum. Finally they see how the GVV design can be adapted for assessment of learning initiatives. Social implications – The GVV curriculum holds the promise of helping business students to not only know what is right but also learn and importantly practice how to get it done in their business careers. Originality/value of paper – The chapter’s contribution is to provide concrete examples of two school’s multi-year experiences using the GVV curriculum, at both undergraduate and graduate levels, and an assessment of its impacts, both

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

108

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

from faculty perspectives and in terms of student assessment. The GVV curriculum is expanding rapidly around the world and there is a need for such concrete and informative accounts of how it has been implemented and to what effect.

Can management educators teach future business practitioners and leaders to have integrity? That question remains with the psychologists and the philosophers — and ultimately the historians. However, the premise of the Giving Voice to Values (GVV) pedagogy and curriculum (GVV) is that educators can, in fact, teach students how to act with integrity and thereby empower receptive and open students to do so more conﬁdently, more effectively, and more often. Thus, GVV is not about ‘‘ﬁxing’’ students who do not want to behave in accordance with their values. Rather it is about providing the skills, the tools, the examples, and the actual opportunity to practice voicing and enacting values for those who would like to do so. And as discussed below, GVV is about creating a normative context where these students do not feel alone with this positive impulse. GVV also starts from the premise that the often-encountered faculty reluctance to ‘‘teach business ethics’’ does not reﬂect a lack of commitment to train responsible business managers and leaders. Rather this reluctance often stems from an understandable discomfort with asserting a deﬁnitive knowledge of right and wrong on the part of individual educators and the awareness that regardless of what is taught in the classroom, students are likely to encounter ethical transgressions and pressures in their professional careers. Faculty themselves want to behave with integrity in their teaching and to reﬂect reality in their classrooms. So with these two premises — an intent to teach ethical action as opposed to the intent to preach to or ‘‘ﬁx’’ students and a respect for the faculty’s commitment to honesty in the classroom — GVV is organized around a different set of assumptions and questions than the typical business ethics curriculum. Rather than asking ‘‘What is the ‘right’ thing to do in a particular situation?’’ — a question that too often leads students to practice crafting rationalizations for questionable actions or to generate self-defeating portraits of a business context inhospitable to ethical action — GVV poses the questions: ‘‘What if you knew what you believed was ‘right’? How would you get it done? What would you say, to whom, in what sequence? What information and analysis would you need to build your most effective case? What allies could you ﬁnd or develop to rely upon?’’ Rather than focusing on those thorny and complex ethical dilemmas — the ones where reasonable and intelligent individuals of good will may legitimately disagree — GVV focuses on the conﬂicts where the ethics and even the legality of the situation are much clearer, the kind of situation where many, if not most, would agree on the ‘‘right’’ course of action. GVV does this not to avoid the complexity but rather because the exclusive focus on those so-called right versus right or wrong versus wrong sorts of dilemmas too often leads to a sense that any choice is just as good or bad as any other. And even more importantly, a look at the kinds of negative press

Giving Voice to Values

109

and scandal that has plagued the business arena and that has led to a measurable decline in public trust of corporations and the markets reveals that the most troubling behaviors tend to be those more clear-cut examples: that is, the cases of clear dishonesty with investors and consumers and regulators, the cases of fraud, illegality, and outright abuse. On the contrary, the more ambiguous questions about whether a new technology is better or worse for the environment or whether outsourced employment is necessarily exploitative toward foreign workers or unfair to domestic ones, while difﬁcult and important, raise questions that intelligent people of good will may legitimately disagree upon, and therefore less likely to fuel the fundamental cynicism we have seen in recent years. By shifting the question asked and the kind of situation addressed, as explained above, GVV creates space in the classroom to focus on crafting action plans and practicing — literally ‘‘pre-scripting’’ — how students can respond when they encounter all too frequent workplace value conﬂicts and the pressures to act in ways they know are unethical. The faculty member is free to step over the philosophical debates about utilitarianism versus deontology and instead to focus on the realm of rehearsal for action and peer coaching. This is not to say that the philosophical debates are not important — they unquestionably are — but they are precisely the debates that faculty trained in accounting or marketing or ﬁnance or operations are usually less comfortable moderating, generating the often bemoaned barriers to integrating ethical issues into the core business curriculum. They are the conversations that appropriately belong in the business ethics classroom. The GVV approach allows faculty to moderate a discussion of how students might generate persuasive arguments to address values conﬂicts, using the language of their relevant function (e.g., accounting, ﬁnance, and marketing), as opposed to requiring business function faculty to ﬁeld a debate about ‘‘what is right’’ that draws on Aristotle or John Rawls or Kant. These basic premises about where to focus, what is possible in the business classroom, and what will make the greatest impact on students led to the development of the GVV approach to values-driven leadership development. The curriculum itself builds on interviews and conversations with managers at all levels, from recent graduates to senior executives, about times when they did ﬁnd ways to effectively voice their values. GVV then draws on management and social psychology research on decision-making biases, heuristics and framing tendencies, to generate a set of tools and approaches to help students craft effective and persuasive arguments to counter the common ‘‘reasons and rationalizations’’ for unethical choices. It is designed for integration across the core curriculum, although it is useful in the business ethics course context as well and it builds upon the foundations set there. The GVV curriculum is distinguished by several features: A focus on how a manager raises values-based issues in an effective manner — what he/she needs to do to be heard and how to correct an existing course of action when necessary. An emphasis on positive examples of times when people have found ways to voice and thereby implement their values in the workplace.

110

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

The importance of self-assessment and a focus on individual strengths when looking for a way to align one’s individual sense of purpose and that of the organization. Opportunities to construct and practice responses to frequently heard reasons and rationales for not acting on one’s values. Practice in providing peer feedback and coaching. GVV shifts the classroom focus from ethical debate to pre-scripting and practicing responses to predictable values conﬂicts future managers are likely to encounter, and it helps build an enabling normative context by means of the opportunity for peercoaching to reﬁne and enhance student scripts and implementation plans. Education for integrity is no longer about ‘‘thou shalt not’’ but rather about ‘‘can do,’’ appealing to the pragmatic, creative, and action-oriented business student. And through their rehearsal for values-based action, students build the muscle memory to make voicing and enacting their values, clearly, skillfully, and effectively, more of a default position. With venture support from The Aspen Institute as incubator and, along with Yale School of Management, founding partner for GVV, and now housed at and funded by Babson College, GVV currently includes hundreds of pages of cases, exercises, readings, and teaching plans all available for free to educators (www.Giving VoiceToValues.org). The innovative approach has been piloted on six continents at well over 125 business schools and other organizations. Although developed for use in MBA programs, increasingly it is being used in undergraduate and executive programs and is being reviewed and adapted for use in schools of engineering and health-related ﬁelds and liberal arts, as well as businesses themselves and NGOs. Custom collections of GVV curricula are being developed to feature region-speciﬁc (e.g., India and China) and topic- or function-speciﬁc (e.g., sustainability, social entrepreneurship, and marketing) materials. In the following pages, two examples of GVV implementation are discussed in detail, illustrating how this pedagogy can be used at both the undergraduate and the graduate levels and sharing some of the different applications and emphases that individual faculty and schools have taken. At The College of William & Mary, GVV is a unique tool for working with undergraduate business students, helping them to craft an individual commitment and competence for values-driven behavior at the very start of their careers. Here, GVV is used in the foundational and introductory business course for all majors, setting the stage, establishing a tone and afﬁrming a commitment to values-driven management at the outset of their studies. The William & Mary example illustrates that the GVV approach works not only with individuals who already have had some signiﬁcant organizational experience but also with students who are new to management. Given their youth and relative lack of experience, there is a particular emphasis upon two of the core principles of GVV — ‘‘self-knowledge and alignment’’ and individual ‘‘choice’’ — in the approach taken with these undergraduates. To this end, the adaptation of two unique GVV exercises — ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ and ‘‘Framing a Life Story’’ — is described below. The relevance of this approach to recent research is also noted.

Giving Voice to Values

111

At Simmons School of Management, GVV became a mechanism for implementing the school’s MBA mission to ‘‘educate women for power and principled leadership.’’ They have used GVV as a tool for delivering on the ‘‘holy grail’’ of values-driven leadership development: that is, integration across the curriculum. They accomplish this by introducing the ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace’’1 (Gentile, 2010a) and the process of ‘‘pre-scripting’’ for values conﬂicts at various pivotal moments across the core curriculum. The faculty at Simmons also found GVV to be a mechanism for addressing yet another thorny challenge of business ethics education, that of assessment, and this process is described below as well. The two cases also demonstrate that the GVV curriculum is designed ﬂexibly so that it may be adopted and used by an individual faculty member in a single class session or module within his or her course, required or elective (as in the College of William & Mary example); it may serve as the focus of a dedicated required or elective course;2 or it may be integrated across the entire curriculum (as in the Simmons example). Also as illustrated, faculty may use the existing GVV cases and exercises that are all available for free to educators, or they may adapt the approach for use with their own existing cases and course materials (as in the case of the Simmons Accounting course example). Finally, the following illustrations demonstrate that the GVV curriculum appeals to the creativity and action-orientation of business students and provides an opportunity to build a (formal and/or informal) peer network for ﬁnding and practicing ways to be their best selves in their professional careers. Although a relatively new initiative, several faculty are designing both qualitative and quantitative studies to better understand its impacts, and the rapid spread of the curriculum globally is encouraging. Anecdotal reports are positive, both from faculty who enjoy using the approach and students who report behavior changes, as discussed below.

6.1. GVV with Undergraduates at the Mason School of Business, College of William & Mary 6.1.1.

Introduction: Using GVV with Undergraduates

Critics of business ethics education often note that by the time students enter in MBA programs, they are in the mid-20s or older and thus their moral character is already

1. Download this foundational GVV reading as well as ‘‘Starting Assumptions for Giving Voice to Values’’ by Mary C. Gentile under the ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org. 2. For example, GVV is used as the organizing principle and approach in a required graduate course at the University of Western Australia-Perth, and it is the primary focus of an undergraduate elective offered at the School of Business at Notre Dame University in the United States.

112

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

formed (Ford Foundation Report, 2002). Accordingly, they doubt the impact of ethics courses in changing students’ behavior. By contrast, the search for and shaping of values is often associated with the undergraduate experience. Within the college environment, students explore new ideas and social settings and encounter views that challenge and even threaten their own values. While many are insulated from the pressures of ‘‘real life,’’ undergraduates do experience the power of social pressures and group norms and struggle to ﬁnd their own voice with their peers and discover their own path for the future. In short, college life is rich with opportunities to voice one’s values — or to remain quiet in the face of ethical transgressions. Despite this rich context for developing values-based leaders, ethics initiatives often bypass college life and thrust students into case scenarios that are far removed from their everyday experience. For example, many business ethics texts focus exclusively on cases and readings in professional settings. Exposing students to the challenges they will face in the business environment is necessary, yet faculty face a challenge: Most undergraduates have had little, if any, professional experience. Engaging in business cases from the outset can be difﬁcult, for the episodes discussed may not resonate with those who are reading them. GVV offers faculty a means for bridging this experience gap. GVV can be applied to the scenarios in their present context, offering relevance for the here-and-now of college life. At the same time, GVV utilizes cases and exercises that reveal the complexities and reality involved in business settings and creates opportunities to practice voicing their values in these professional contexts. Moreover, GVV can leverage undergraduates’ lack of experience. Inﬂuenced by their past work experience, MBAs may arrive with a jaded past view of voicing values in business; undergraduates may be more open-minded and optimistic about practicing one’s values in the workplace. Using positive examples and practical frameworks, faculty can use GVV to foster the norm that professionals can and do voice their values in their workplace. And lest such optimism lead to naive idealism, GVV provides a pragmatic action-based approach where students develop personalized responses to realistic and complex business challenges.

6.1.2.

GVV with New Business Students at William & Mary

Every autumn, the College of William & Mary welcomes 180 new business majors (third-year of study) into the Mason School of Business. Curious, hard-working, and multi-dimensional in both talents and interests, they offer great promise as the next generation of business leaders. They enter their ﬁrst semester of business study nervous, excited, and impressionable; they are looking for examples to follow and strategies for success. They are eager to learn and eager to lead from their values and passions — whether this means leading a student organization, balancing the challenges of being a student-athlete, starting their own business or non-proﬁt, or getting that ﬁrst internship. Developing these future leaders requires an experiential approach to education, where students can actively practice skills and strategies. In

Giving Voice to Values

113

response, William & Mary begins the business school experience with the Integrated Foundation Semester, weaving the themes of teamwork, communication, global issues, and ethical decision-making across introductory courses in ﬁnance, marketing and information systems. Within the introductory business ethics course in the foundation semester, GVV is used to norm and practice the skills of values-based leadership by way of selfdiscovery and scripting. Students begin by ﬁrst exploring their own past experiences in voicing their values. The reﬂection ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’3 (Gentile, 2010b) illustrates ‘‘the power of choice’’ (Gentile, 2010c, p. 47) in their past decisions, helping them discover the factors that support and inhibit their own ability to voice their values. As the course proceeds to case analyses, faculty use the ‘‘reasons and rationalizations’’ framework (Gentile, 2010c, p. 170) to teach students how stakeholder analysis leads to pragmatic strategizing and scripting as they identify levers for speaking up. Near the end of the course, students are challenged to personalize the GVV approach through ‘‘self-knowledge and alignment’’ (Gentile, 2010c, p. 108). Here students develop ‘‘self-stories’’ that describe the strategies and scripts that best exemplify their personal strengths. This progression of exercises and cases fosters the self-discovery that is relevant for undergraduates while simultaneously cultivating the practices of reﬂection, analysis, and action-planning necessary for values-based leadership.

6.1.3.

A Tale of Two Stories: Beginning with Personal Past Experience We understand new or complex things in relation to things we already know. (Haidt, 2006)

If undergraduates lack experience in business contexts, where can faculty begin in teaching business ethics? Business ethics texts tend to begin with the ‘‘ethics’’ angle, with an emphasis on foundations in ethical theory to help students understand the philosophical frameworks that they can apply to the ethical scenarios. Many texts complement such readings with the ‘‘business’’ angle, exposing students to business contexts through cases that pose ethical challenges for the business professional. This balance of theory and context is valuable and well-intentioned, yet lacks an experiential relevance for undergraduates. These new ways of thinking and acting in business settings may be so foreign to the students’ own experience that they may struggle to achieve depth of analysis, or internalize the lessons for action in their future careers. The exercise, ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b), offers an alternative starting point that simply and powerfully introduces the GVV approach. The

3. ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories,’’ as well as other curricular materials, can be found under the ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.

114

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

exercise builds from the second assumption of GVV: ‘‘I have voiced my values, at some points in my past’’ (Gentile, 2010c, p. 224). Instead of looking ahead to business scenarios they’ve never seen, this reﬂection begins by looking backward to events they have experienced in their own lives.4 The exercise is composed of two parts: Part 1: Recall a time in your work experience when your values conﬂicted with what you were expected to do in a particular, non-trivial management decision, and you spoke up and acted to resolve the conﬂict. Part 2: Recall a time in your work experience when your values conﬂicted with what you were expected to do in a particular, non-trivial management decision, and you did not speak up or act to resolve the conﬂict. (Gentile, 2010c, pp. 228–229) The exercise is one of reﬂection and discovery. Parts 1 and 2 engage students in personal reﬂection on their own past as they identify signiﬁcant moral moments of success and failure. As students compare and contrast their own episodes and hear the stories of their peers, each student can discover their own strategies for voicing their values and gain insights into the strategies others have used. They learn that acting on their values is possible and normal — both in their own lives and in the lives of their fellow students. Discussion questions help focus the reﬂection on the internal processes and external conditions that enable or inhibit their ability to voice to their values. At William & Mary, ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ is used to introduce the GVV approach to new business majors within their introductory business ethics course. Students are encouraged to describe episodes from their work experience (such as a past job or internship), or should they lack such experience, they can use a leadership, team, or group situation during their time in college. Students complete the exercise within the ﬁrst two weeks of the semester as a written, take-home assignment, which they later submit to the faculty, assured of their conﬁdentiality. By using this exercise early in the course, and by giving students time outside of class to reﬂect and share their stories conﬁdentially, faculty lay a foundation for depth of reﬂection and greater personal engagement in the course. The recalling and reﬂecting on their own stories makes the learning more real, more experiential, and ultimately more relevant. The exercise of writing and retelling the episodes promotes moral awareness in a meaningful way for the awareness is applied to their personal lives, not a theoretical situation. At the same time, the exercise promotes both self and organizational awareness; as they continue to examine their own scenarios, students look inward for insight about what empowers and weakens their own voices, and

4. This exercise activates an important feature of memory that can be overlooked in ethics education: our episodic memory. ‘‘Episodic memory is concerned with remembering past experiences as such. This is the crux of episodic memory: it has to do with conscious recollection of previous experiences of events, happenings, and situations. The emphasis is on ‘experience,’ rather than ‘event’ or ‘happening.’’’ (Tulving & Markowitsch, 1998).

Giving Voice to Values

115

they look outward for the circumstances and conditions that facilitate or obstruct their ability to speak up. When students recall episodes from past workplaces, their stories typically involve restaurants and retail settings or summer camps and community pools (the backdrop for waiters, salespeople, camp counselors and lifeguards), while others share from their ﬁrst professional internship.5 Many students ﬁnd it difﬁcult to recall a value conﬂict from a former workplace, yet they easily identify episodes from college life. Here the scenes depict a range of social settings: the varsity sports team, fraternity or sorority life, student clubs. Several share situations of academic integrity. While the speciﬁc contexts vary, most of situations could be categorized as ‘‘truth versus loyalty’’ or ‘‘individual versus community’’ (Kidder, 2005). The conﬂicts involve voicing their values with both their peers (i.e., observing friends and co-workers stealing from the college or business organization) and with authority ﬁgures (i.e., managers and coaches asking them to participate in practices of questionable integrity). In a class session following the assignment, student teams begin by sharing their stories of effectively voicing values with their team. Beginning with positive examples makes it easier for students to share and reinforces the idea that voicing values is normal and possible. Rather than share stories of failing to voice values (which can make many students uncomfortable and can be a kind of imprinting on the negative), the instructor facilitates a conversation focusing on common ‘‘enablers and disablers’’ — individual, situational, or organizational characteristics that make it easier or more difﬁcult to voice and enact one’s values — having students ﬁrst provide examples in their own teams; then a team representative reports to the class. The team representative shares both the common enablers and disablers, while the instructor records these on the whiteboard. The team representative also shares the most original or surprising enabler that the team found valuable.6 This discussion takes the private reﬂection of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ and makes public the best practices and common pitfalls of voicing values as a college student.

5. GVV has several cases that focus on early work experiences, from internships (‘‘Market Research Deception,’’ ‘‘Online Identities,’’ and ‘‘Student Privileges with Strings Attached’’), college jobs (‘‘Part-time Job with Full-time Challenge’’), and ﬁrst jobs after college (‘‘Is This My Place Speaking Up?’’). These cases can be downloaded from www.GivingVoiceToValues.org. 6. While Gentile uses the language of enablers and disablers in reﬂecting on past experiences, one can also connect this exercise to the research of Robin Hogarth (2001) on learning structures in the educating our intuitive responses. He describes environments that offer relevant, accurate, and timely feedback and hold individuals accountable for their actions as kind learning structures, while those that reinforce wrong behaviors through inaccurate and untimely feedback and weak consequences are wicked learning structures. If moral intuitions are built on one’s past experiences and how the feedback one received, then one’s past learning structures, whether at home, school, or work, have a signiﬁcant impact on one’s moral intuition: ‘‘The quality of your intuitions depends on the kinds of learning that prevailed when these were acquired’’ (p. 89). The ‘‘Tale of Two Stories’’ exercise can help students uncover the learning structures that were present in situations where they voiced their values effectively, and where they found voicing their values difﬁcult.

116

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

Enablers and strategies of success that students identify include: consulting with a trusted friend or mentor for feedback; ﬁnding support amongst co-workers or peers who will speak up with you; using humor to broach difﬁcult subjects; imagining themselves in another’s shoes, or imagining that a loved one in the role of the individual at risk; deeply considering the consequences of getting caught; framing the situation as an opportunity or a chance to lead by example and inspire others. Disablers or rationalizations typically include: fear of losing the esteem of others (peers or authority ﬁgures); over-optimism; assuming that those in authority must be right; rationalizing that the behavior in question is ‘‘no big deal’’ and is ‘‘normal’’ in this context; comparing oneself to others; fear of losing one’s status or position or ﬁnancial beneﬁt; being invisible (no one else knows of the information or can see how you will respond); seeing how big or deep the problem is, and how speaking up won’t make a difference. Generating this list of insights engages students in self and social awareness. Moreover, faculty can see how the types of college conﬂicts and the common enablers and disablers are remarkably similar to the conﬂicts and conditions characteristic of values conﬂicts in the workplace. ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ primes the students to make these connections from their own experience to the challenges in business, and faculty have a wealth of stories and insights to bridge the experience gap facing undergraduates. As Gentile notes: ‘‘Recognizing the fact we are capable of speaking and acting on our values, as well as the fact that we have not always done so, is both empowering and enlighteningyIt opens a path to self-knowledge, as well as situational analysis, that we may otherwise short-circuit’’ (Gentile, 2010b, p. 49). Having opened these paths by reﬂecting on their own stories, students can bring these personal insights to bear on business cases.

6.1.4.

Reasons and Rationalizations: GVV Stakeholder Analysis and Action Planning Recently graduated from college, Ben landed a job as a junior accountant for a non-proﬁt that distributes donated medical supplies to developing countries. He discovers that his organization lacks a formal process for valuing the donated supplies, and in some cases the values may be inﬂated by the donors. Ben wants to raise this concern to his boss, but he does not want to risk his own position or jeopardize relationships with the donors and thus lose donations. ‘‘What should Ben say, to whom, when, and how?’’ (Gentile, 2010e)

This scenario is one of the ﬁrst GVV cases used with the new business students. As a recent college graduate eager to launch his professional career, they ﬁnd it easy to relate to Ben. He also offers a positive example: here is a young professional who not only wants to act on his values, but also seeks the well-being of the organization, and wants to help those in need of medical supplies. At the same time, his particular

Giving Voice to Values

117

situation can seem far removed from their past experience: perhaps they have not been young accountants, they are not aware of the auditing processes that could or should be in place, they may not be aware of the laws or consequences involved in corroborating with potentially deceptive practices. This mix of familiarity with novelty facilitates the connections of students’ pasts to their professional future. As they explore the case in class discussion, students begin to see parallels to their own stories. They have been in situations where problems have been overlooked or dismissed in the face of stressful demands or the need to please others. They have had opportunities to look the other way when they have encountered broken systems and processes. They have faced the rationalization that it can seem easier and safer to keep quiet rather than face the risks and hardship that will likely emerge when speaking up about an organizational problem. Identifying parallels is a good starting point, but to be effective, faculty must foster a richer understanding of the scenarios they may encounter, and practice developing and voicing responses before they ﬁnd themselves in these situation. Depth and breadth of analysis is needed, and in beginning GVV case discussions, students encounter the ‘‘Reasons and Rationalizations’’ (Gentile, 2010f) framework: What are the main arguments you are trying to counter? That is, what are the reasons and rationalizations you need to address? What is at stake for the key parties, including those who disagree with you? What levers can you use to inﬂuence those who disagree with you? What is your most powerful and persuasive response to the reasons and rationalizations you need to address? To whom should the argument be made? When and in what context? This GVV framework is one of perspective-taking and stakeholder analysis. Students begin by placing themselves in the role of the protagonist, and they clarify the internal and external forces that are weighing on the individual. Many of the reasons and rationalizations emerge from self-interest, from social pressure, from concern for friends and family, from fear of authority — forces that college students have already experienced, though perhaps not within business settings. To be effective in communicating their values, they need to move beyond their own perspective and expand their understanding to the other parties involved and consider what is important from these various perspectives. The second question in the framework offers an opportunity to teach undergraduates the skill of stakeholder analysis. At William & Mary, students create diagrams of the stakeholders involved and elaborate on the relationships between stakeholders. In these diagrams students not only label the stakeholders, but they deﬁne the motivations and concerns of each party. The exercise is one of ‘‘zooming in’’ to empathize with each stakeholder and ‘‘zooming out’’ to understand the larger picture of the business scenario and how the parties are related. ‘‘Zooming out’’ helps identify both the obstacles and opportunities that may not be obvious at ﬁrst glance, and where the levers might be for inﬂuence or for win-win solutions. It also helps students recognize the complexity

118

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

of the scenario and that one’s response is often a series of responses to a variety of parties. Students quickly identify the obvious stakeholders and their concerns for Ben’s situation: Ben, his boss, his co-workers, the donors, the recipients in developing countries, the IRS. In diagramming the stakeholders and articulating their concerns, they begin to recognize how interconnected the parties are and how speaking up threatens the value chain for those in need and the viability of the non-proﬁt. At the same time, failing to speak up puts the company and donors at risk. In the face of such complexity, a young professional can easily cower. Some students argue that it is safer and easier to say nothing or that while speaking up would be ideal, the harm here is small in comparison to the good being accomplished through the donations. Yet in the GVV framework, one begins with the assumption that one wants to speak up and can ﬁnd ways to do so. Crafting the response requires connecting their stakeholder analyses with the personal understanding of their own past effectiveness. Students return to their list of enablers from ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ (2010b) in search of past strategies that might work in the present scenario. Some focus on the fact that even though Ben is new and inexperienced, he sees a signiﬁcant problem. They wonder: If Ben can see this, have others noticed it as well? Is everyone looking the other way? Has someone spoken up before? If so, what was the outcome? In short, students realize they need to investigate further, but how to do so carefully? Some suggest Ben innocently raise the issue as the ‘‘new guy’’ trying to understand how things work. This strategy of ‘‘innocent inquiry’’ is one that often emerges from their own stories. Another common strategy that emerges from their past is seeking out a trusted and experienced advisor who can provide you with insight. Others are worried about raising this issue alone and want to build support from other co-workers who will join Ben in raising this issue with his boss. Others worry about Ben’s inexperience so they suggest ﬁnding a credible partner who can verify the concern and help develop a solution, such as the senior accountant. In thinking about solving the problem of valuing supplies, some student teams quickly recognize that the key step in changing the reporting process is how they communicate any change with the donors. They need a policy that is fair and accurate, yet does not suggest that the donors have been guilty of over-valuing supplies, lest they offend them. This GVV case includes two parts, where part B provides students with the details on how Ben voiced his values in the context. The students appreciate learning the outcome, and seeing if any of their proposed strategies were consistent with Ben’s response. They discover that Ben did end up ﬁnding support from the senior accountant, approaching his boss, and ultimately collaborating on a new system where there was an average value per box of donated supplies. Undergraduates develop conﬁdence in this early case, learning that some of their own strategies can be applied in business scenarios. In short, they have seen how lessons from their own past can be applied in new and unfamiliar scenarios. With this positive experience of generating strategies and scripts, undergraduates can begin approaching more complex cases in later class sessions.

Giving Voice to Values 6.1.5.

119

Finding Your Own Voice: The Self-Story Approach Susan’s boss wants her to ‘‘revise the numbers’’ to hide the poor portfolio performance of one of her clients. With the client meeting only a few hours away, she needs to decide quickly how she can do right by her client and her company. What should Susan say, to whom, when, and how? (Gentile, 2010i)

As students and faculty continue case discussions, the class can collaborate in developing a response, identifying various approaches and strengthening the strategy as new perspectives highlight opportunities for action as well as hidden obstacles. The richness of such exploration also includes a potential weakness: in such group discussions, the individual student may not discover their own set of strategies that best builds on their particular strengths. Preparation for future action requires that each student personalize the scripts and strategies for their own identity. The emphasis in GVV on ‘‘self-alignment, self-image, and alignment’’ (Gentile, 2010c) resonates with undergraduates as they seek to develop their own unique voice in launching their careers. GVV offers several curricular exercises for discovering one’s voice, including self-assessment (‘‘Personal-Professional proﬁle,’’ Gentile, 2010g) and crafting a personal narrative (‘‘Framing a Life Story,’’ Gentile, 2010h). GVV also provides guidelines for peer coaching that can be used in student teams to help students discover their own voice. Building on these peer coaching guidelines, Professor Christopher P. Adkins at the College of William & Mary has developed a ‘‘self-story’’ exercise that immerses students within a GVV case; yet in crafting the response, they generate a script that is a reﬂection of their personality, their particular strengths and their enablers. The team structure of the foundation semester is used to help individual team members craft their own self-stories. To demonstrate this approach, two student teams are assigned to prepare a ‘‘selfstory’’ presentation on the case of the day. For example, in the case of Susan above, the teams are asked to present several self-stories of action, one from each team member, to the class. Each story should offer a script that communicates that student’s ‘‘most powerful and persuasive response to the reasons and rationalizations’’ if they were in Susan’s situation and clearly illustrate how their script is rooted in their own strength and personality. By the end of the team presentations, the class will have heard a range of self-stories and action plans, seeing that there are various approaches that might work in speaking up in this case. In developing their ‘‘self-story,’’ students make use of the peer coaching questions7 in the GVV curriculum. Here students can begin to label an approach that best describes how they voice their values. They might describe their strategy as a ‘‘learning stance,’’ where one asks open-ended questions to better understand the

7. See Gentile, 2010, ‘‘Guidelines for Peer Coaching’’ at www.GivingVoiceToValues.org.

120

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

situation or individuals in the case. Others may describe themselves as problemsolvers, seeking ways to ﬁnd a novel win-win answer to the difﬁcult situation. Others may describe their approach as adversarial, directly confronting the issue at hand and boldly stating their position. Such labels, along with a series of questions, help students reﬂect and articulate a strategy that resonates with their personal strengths and past experiences. At William & Mary, the ‘‘self-story’’ exercise is used in the concluding weeks of the course as way to help synthesize and internalize the lessons that have emerged throughout their introductory business ethics course. Students return to ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b) and their list of enablers that they have developed throughout the course. The series of case discussions have further clariﬁed the patterns and conditions for effective action, both within themselves and within organizational contexts. Their self-story solidiﬁes this learning by deﬁning a personal strategic approach that can be applied in the ﬁnal cases of the course.

6.1.6.

The Impact of GVV on New Business Students

The integration of GVV within this ﬁrst business course with new business students was a gradual one. First, faculty began using a few cases, and applying the ‘‘reasons and rationalizations’’ framework to these cases to help shift the analysis from making a decision to putting a decision into action. This case-based approach to GVV did help students focus on action-planning, but the tone and engagement of discussions remained largely the same as when using other case-based approaches to teaching ethics in previous semesters. The turning point in change of tone and depth of personal engagement came with the incorporation of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ early in the semester. Even though new to the business school, most students presented their stories with a remarkable depth of openness and maturity of reﬂection. Moreover, the lists of enablers and disablers displayed greater depth and breadth in later case discussions. It appears that the personal nature of ‘‘A Tale of Two Stories’’ facilitates an engagement that is missing in a more analytical, less personal approach, at least with this population of undergraduates. The ‘‘self-story’’ approach to cases is a relatively new exercise in the program, but has received extremely positive feedback from the students. Many indicate that the peer coaching guidelines, with the reﬂection questions and position labels, helped them articulate their particular strategy or stance in voicing their values. Most powerful, however, were the peer presentations of the self-story exercise; hearing their fellow classmates share their unique voices and scripts to the same cases illustrated the diversity of strategies and richness of personalities in the class. Such sharing not only sparked new ideas but reinforced the norm of voicing values and playing to one’s strengths. GVV at William & Mary illustrates how the curriculum can be used effectively with new business students, even with their relative lack of experience and business expertise. As undergraduates participate in internships and advanced courses, GVV can be used in these new contexts to deepen their learning from these experiences.

Giving Voice to Values

121

6.2. GVV in the Simmons SOM MBA Program Leadership is, in part, about clarifying and afﬁrming personal and community values (Heifetz, 1994; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). In fact, Kouzes and Posner view this task as the ‘‘First Law of Leadership’’ (p. 47). To pursue the school’s mission, the SOM faculty teaches concepts of principled leadership and then assesses students’ mastery of these concepts in biannual assessment of learning (AoL) workshops. In the December 2007 workshop, faculty noted that students did not perform well across several categories related to ethics and its mission. This realization moved the dean and faculty to act quickly: By January 2008 several faculty were working with the GVV methodology to integrate modules into their courses. In the language of the assessment process, the SOM moved rapidly to ‘‘close the loop’’ once a gap in students’ knowledge had been identiﬁed. Founded in 1974 by Margaret Henning and Anne Jardim, two scholars who were the ﬁrst women to receive their doctorates from the Harvard Business School in the 1960s, the SOM is a mission-driven institution that has designed its MBA program for women students. While the faculty teaches rigorously the same functional MBA courses as other business schools, the curriculum and much of faculty’s research focus on topics of particular interest to women leaders. One such topic is ethics and corporate social responsibility. Our students, like women students in The Aspen Institute’s 2008 survey of MBA students’ attitudes about business and society, are keenly interested in values conﬂicts that arise in a broad spectrum of business issues.8 Because of our students’ deep interest in ethical issues, the December 2007 assessment data was surprising. By August 2008, the SOM faculty began to teach the GVV framework in its Foundations course. One year later the students’ selected commencement student speaker talked about how compelling the GVV curriculum was. How had the SOM faculty integrated the GVV curriculum so quickly and thoroughly into its MBA Program?

6.2.1.

Application of the GVV Framework into the Core Curriculum

In early 2008, several faculty expressed interest in working with the GVV curriculum. The dean and faculty decided to integrate GVV modules across the core courses, rather than create a standalone course. The integration is summarized in Table 6.1 and Figure 6.1. Faculty believed that repetition of practice (a core tenet of GVV) would best be done spread throughout the MBA Program from the ﬁrst to last courses, adding depth and breadth to practical ways of thinking about ethical issues.

8. See gender differences noted in the 2008 report of ‘‘Where will they lead?’’ Center for Business Education, The Aspen Institute.

122

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

Table 6.1: Application of GVV in the Simmons School of Management MBA core curriculum. Course

Materials

Duration of GVV module

Foundations

Case: Martha McCaskey (HBSP 9-403-114) Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace (Mary Gentile, GVV materials)

90 minutes

Leading Individuals and Groups (core micro-OB course)

Case: Mobley, M. E. & Humphreys, J. (2006). How low will you go? Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 33–44 Gentile, M. (2010). Keeping your colleagues honest. Harvard Business Review, 88(3), 114–117

90 minutes (in a 180 minutes session on ethics)

Career Strategies

Case: Helen Drinan, Case Research Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, Spring 2011 Review ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace’’ and ‘‘Keeping Your Colleagues Honest’’

180 minutes

Managerial Accounting

Garrison, Noreen and Brewer (2009): Managerial Accounting, 13th ed., McGraw-Hill Irwin Review of ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace’’ (Mary Gentile, GVV materials)

About 30 minutes in each of three pertinent classes

LGA

Case: Malden Mills (HBSP 9-404-072) Review of ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace’’ (Mary Gentile, GVV materials)

180 minutes

In general, our MBA students are working professionals who have returned to school to advance or change their careers. Because they have substantial work experience (seven years on the average), they come into the MBA Program knowing that conﬂicts in values are common in the workplace, and yet many say that they do not

Giving Voice to Values Progra m Accelerated Full Time

2.5-Year Part Time (fall start)

Fall 1 Foundations, Leading Individuals and Groups, Career Strategies Foundations, Leading Individuals and Groups

2-Year Part Time (spring start)

Spring 1

Summer 1

Managerial Accounting

Career Strategies Foundations, Leading Individuals and Groups

Fall 2

Spring 2

Summer 2

Fall 3

123

Spring 3

LGA

Managerial Accounting

LGA Career Strategies

Managerial Accounting

LGA

Figure 6.1: Timing of GVV in the Simmons School of Management MBA core curriculum (a selection of available programs) know how to deal with the conﬂict.9 The practical approach of GVV appeals to working professionals who quickly see the applicability of its methodology. While GVV has been integrated into the SOM’s core MBA curriculum since 2008, there has also been an evolution in the use of materials and the ways in which the materials are taught to reﬂect changes in faculty personnel and in individual faculty’s identiﬁcation of students’ responses to particular materials.

6.2.2.

Foundations

Foundations is a one-week orientation program required of all students who enter the MBA program. One of the cases discussed in Foundations, Martha McCaskey (Van Dissel, Margolis, & Kanji, 2004), is used to introduce the GVV framework. The case had been used before the adoption of the GVV curriculum and — like several other non-GVV-speciﬁc cases — works very well with the new framework. In preparation, students study the case and read ‘‘Ways of Thinking about Our Values in the Workplace,’’ (Gentile, 2010a) to glean initial information on the GVV approach. The case presents Martha McCaskey, a project leader at a consulting ﬁrm. McCaskey is asked to complete a project that could secure her promotion and a signiﬁcant raise. McCaskey, however, cannot see a way to complete the project without compromising her values. Faced with a tight deadline, she is asked to present an action plan to complete the project by paying someone off to get information of questionable quality. Her boss had already promised this information to the client, overstating its value. McCaskey, pressured by her supervisors and colleagues, has already engaged in some dubious activities. She had, for example, misrepresented herself to the informant in her prior conversation. To speak up now seems risky if not impossible. Part of the discussion focuses on ‘‘normalizing’’ the values conﬂicts (Gentile, 2010c). The students explore the reasons why McCaskey should not be surprised by the difﬁcult circumstances that she is facing and examine the factors in the industry

9. This is consistent with the 2008 report of the Center for Business Education, The Aspen Institute.

124

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

as well as those speciﬁc to McCaskey’s ﬁrm that show why such situations should be expected and may even be unavoidable. While the branch in which McCaskey works is portrayed as particularly lax about ethical standards, the discussion points to the fact that similar situations may arise across industries and organizations. In the exploration of how the values conﬂict developed over time, the instructor asks students to generate options for McCaskey at the ﬁnal juncture in the case. Recognizing that going along with the request or passing the buck to a colleague — the options that McCaskey contemplates at the end of the case — is not consistent with her values, the students generate other options, consistent with GVV approach. McCaskey could (1) speak to her supervisors about her concerns or (2) contact the ﬁrm’s headquarters and inform them about the questionable practices in her branch. They suggest she should approach the conversation with the goal of aligning her job with her values but that, if that turns out to be impossible, she should quit. Students’ initial suggestions about how to approach these conversations sound aggressive, judgmental, and accusatory. They are eager to say their piece, but they are not yet ready to do so effectively. Using the language of GVV, the students then explore the risks that McCaskey faces if she pushes back on her boss, or if she goes along with his plan. They identify her disablers, the reasons she might have for not speaking up, such as her sense that this kind of approach may be common. McCaskey also has a number of enablers for action, such as her excellent track record at the ﬁrm. In groups of three, students work for 10 minutes to generate action plans for McCaskey. Each group picks one of the options and generates ideas about what McCaskey should say, what responses she can expect from her counterparts, and how she can address those responses. After 10 minutes, the instructor calls on a few groups to act as McCaskey while the instructor takes on the role of Martha’s counterpart to allow students to practice voicing their values. The discussion and group work help the students hone their approaches into persuasive, rational, business-oriented arguments. This ﬁrst exposure to GVV leaves students feeling empowered to act in accordance with their values. Even those who at the beginning believed McCaskey slid down the slippery slope and has no way back, later come up with responses to their counterparts’ who ask why ‘‘all of a sudden’’ McCaskey has a problem with the approach. Moreover, those students who, from the start, feel strongly that McCaskey should speak up, generate speciﬁc ideas about how to do so while minimizing the chances of losing her job.

6.2.3.

Leading Individuals and Groups

Students get their next opportunity to practice giving voice to their values in the introductory organization behavior course. Its intention is to improve students’ ability to effectively lead and manage individuals and groups. One of the course’s 14 three-hour sessions is exclusively dedicated to ethics, with many of the other sessions touching on the importance of principled leadership, as well.

Giving Voice to Values

125

Before the ethic session, the students read four documents (Gentile, 2010d; McCoy, 1997; Paine, 2007; Mobley & Humphreys, 2006), to revisit the complexity of ethical dilemmas. The class session is structured in two parts around the case, ‘‘How low will you go?’’ The case’s main protagonist, Bob Carlton, is the owner and CEO of OptiMotors Industries, a midsize engine-parts manufacturer. His sales manager, McDowell, whom he hired at the urging of angel investors, is taking his prospective clients to a local strip club. This does not sit well with Carlton but he lets it go when McDowell suggests that this is simply how business gets done. The situation escalates when one of the female salespersons quits because of disagreements with McDowell and another considers pressing charges for discrimination. Carlton needs to decide how to proceed. Even though he is the CEO, ostensibly with the authority to dismiss McDowell if he does not comply with Carlton’s standards, he must manage the expectations of the angel investors and the degree to which his business depends on successful sales. In the ﬁrst part of the discussion, we treat ethics in the traditional way, analyzing the case using Paine’s framework. While students enter the discussion with various personal views about the ethicality of strip club visits and using those visits to gain sales, the framework allows the students to see the downside of this approach for various stakeholders and for the long-term interests of OptiMotors. Once they arrive at the decision that Carlton needs to stop the practice, the students are ready to formulate action plans, using the GVV frameworks. They usually come up with two possibilities: (1) ﬁre McDowell or (2) keep McDowell but persuade him to change his approach. For each, they need a script for Carlton to voice his values. The students recognize McDowell’s arguments that taking clients to gentlemen’s clubs is ‘‘standard practice’’ and is ‘‘no big deal.’’ They identify the stakes of each of the stakeholders: Carlton, McDowell, the angel investors, the saleswomen, and the salesmen who have also engaged in this practice with successful outcomes. They are explicitly urged to assume that each of the stakeholders is a pragmatist: someone who wants to do the right thing but is not willing to place oneself at a systematic disadvantage by doing it. In the discussion, students identify the levers that Carlton has such as the legal risks for OptiMotors’ if they continue with the practice; ﬁnding allies in the angel investors if Carlton presents risks to them; and the false dichotomy that McDowell implicitly presented to Carlton (‘‘Do you want squeaky clean practices or do you want sales?’’). Students also often suggest identifying positive examples of successful sales that have been made without the dubious practice. They are aware that Carlton cannot afford to lose sales with the increased capacity into which he and others had just invested. Once the whole class identiﬁes the levers, they work in pairs to develop action plans for Carlton. In the plenary discussion that follows, students state what course of action they plan (most of them ﬁrst try to persuade McDowell to change his approach and only dismiss him if he is unwilling to comply), and then role play the conversations. The instructor plays the role of McDowell, taking a very inﬂexible stance. The whole class helps the student in the role of Carlton to improve his approach and strengthen his arguments, and the role play is repeated several times to help Carlton become increasingly more successful at his task.

126

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

The students conclude the session with effective alternatives to what seems initially like a lose-lose situation. At the beginning, many students believe that McDowell needs to be dismissed to end the practice but assess that option as risky for OptiMotors’ sales; they come to understand that they may persuade McDowell to comply with higher ethical standards if Carlton outlines the risks and uses available levers.

6.2.4.

Career Strategies

Decades ago, the SOM faculty decided to make the Career Strategies course part of the required core curriculum. This is in contrast to most business schools where similar courses are electives. The faculty made this decision because of ever-present facts: women make approximately 75 cents on the dollar that men make (Lang, 2010); the reality of the glass-ceiling (Lang, 2010); the continued experience of second generation gender issues, practices that seem neutral but disproportionately negatively affect women (Trefalt, Merrill-Sands, Kolb, Wilson, & Carter, 2010); and the knowledge that women’s careers are more difﬁcult to manage than men’s (Blake-Beard, O’Neill, Ingols, & Shapiro, 2010; Shapiro, Ingols, O’Neill, & Blake-Beard, 2009). All students at the SOM, then, spend somewhere between 30 and 40 hours during their MBA studies analyzing themselves and their careers.10 As part of this required self-analysis, students engage in several approaches to values’ clariﬁcations. There is, for example, an online career diagnostic instrument titled ‘‘CareerLeader’’s (see www.careerleader.com). This instrument consists of three parts, but the one that is relevant for this discussion is the diagnosis of what motivates people (i.e., work reward values). It is a tedious section that takes students about one hour to complete, as the 13 values are paired against one another and students are forced to select one value over another. In the ﬁnal report, students learn their numeric score and whether or not this score is in a range of high, medium, or low. As a follow-on to this comparative, quantitative approach to values’ clariﬁcation, students use a workbook to add a qualitative dimension to their analysis. They are asked to answer a series of self-reﬂective questions from ‘‘Ways of Thinking’’ (Gentile, 2010a), including questions about purpose, risk, personal communication style, loyalty, and selfimage. These two approaches ask students to understand their strengths and styles when faced with a conﬂict in values and challenge them to develop a personal and professional proﬁle that will help each person when next she encounters a workplace values’ conﬂict. This process is the prelude to the three-hour module on GVV. Speciﬁcally, students prepare for the three-hour class by reviewing Gentile’s Ways of Thinking and reading the Helen Drinan case (Shapiro, Ingols, & Gentile, 2011). Students are given a grid with classic GVV questions (e.g., who are the stakeholders

10. Several years ago one cohort of students nicknamed the course ‘‘the me, me, me course.’’

Giving Voice to Values

127

that the protagonist will face and what does each have at risk?) that is turned in at the beginning of class. The faculty adopted this approach to challenge students to analyze the situation that Drinan faces before they practice delivering a script. Once the students have thoroughly analyzed the situation,11 then they are asked to practice articulating their values to a selected stakeholder. The faculty asks students to work individually, answering standard GVV questions, such as to whom the protagonist should speak and what she should say. Once students have individually written down notes for a script to a particular stakeholder, they get into triads and take turns playing one of two roles, speaker and listeners. They give one another feedback and learn from one another how and why to approach various stakeholders. Once students have spent a speciﬁed time in these small groups, a faculty member debriefs the conversations, asking what students learned and what questions remain for them. Finally, the faculty asks students to suggest colleagues whose scripts were particularly compelling; these students stand and deliver their scripts. Invariably, students select to speak their values to different stakeholders, adding to the richness of the discussion about values and articulating one’s concerns.

6.2.5.

Managerial Accounting

This course introduces students to cost management and management controls, and to the generation, use and interpretation of management and cost information under various organizational systems. In contrast to primarily externally oriented ﬁnancial accounting, managerial accounting is internally oriented and context driven. Throughout the course, the students consider what is right and wrong when it comes to internal reporting and systems. At three points in the semester, students use the GVV approach to practice their responses to organizational pressures for inappropriate behavior in increasingly more complex and far-reaching circumstances. The ﬁrst opportunity is the discussion of ‘‘fudging the budget;’’ the second is the question of delaying the reporting of some relevant information to the subsequent quarter; and the third is the issue of setting artiﬁcially low standards of performance. While many GVV cases on these topics are available,12 the instructor continues to use the cases needed to cover the accounting material and complements each with a short vignette in which the protagonist is asked to act against her values. These vignettes serve as the basis for GVV discussion. The students explore the consequences of unethical decisions and recognize the ripple effect of seemingly small transgressions by looking at how inaccurate reporting affects not only intra-organizational dynamics but also a number of external stakeholders.

11. The Instructor’s Manual for the Drinan case has an extensive debrieﬁng of class discussions. 12. From ‘‘Curriculum’’ tab on http://www.GivingVoiceToValues.com

128

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

Once students articulate a reporting standard that applies in the situation, they work in dyads to develop responses to the situations described in vignettes, in which their supervisor asks them to ‘‘fudge the numbers.’’ Despite practicing GVV in other courses, students are often reticent to be deﬁnitive about their beliefs and positions in this course. Furthermore, despite having the ‘‘correct numerical solution,’’ they are uncomfortable using that as the basis upon which to build their dialogue or discuss the necessary actions to take and voice their values. They begin with the ‘‘innocent novice’’ approach, in which they ask qualitative types of questions rather than pointing out the numerical impact of mistakes. But, some of the more astute students will pounce on this and suggest that highlighting the consequences may be more effective. The class moves forward to a more comprehensive approach, by addressing the power of a solid numerical basis upon which to build their position. Once they recognize it, students eagerly use it going forward. They challenge the often-used ‘‘no big deal’’ rationalization by exposing the far-reaching consequences of a particular practice — not only on internal stakeholders, but also on external stakeholders. In the end, the class crafts several approaches using the numerical impact of the error or lapse in judgment as the foundation upon which to build their arguments and voice the values they embrace. The issues that the students tackle get increasingly complex as the semester progresses, because the concerns impact an ever broader set of stakeholders. Yet, through practice and feedback, the students improve their ability to effectively voice their values and respond to pressures and potential supervisors’ arguments under various circumstances.

6.2.6.

Leadership, Governance, and Accountability

Leadership, governance, and accountability (LGA) is the capstone course and is focused on making business decisions that are consistent with a manager’s ﬁduciary, legal, and ethical responsibilities. The course existed with the same purpose prior to our adoption of the GVV framework. One class included a case on Malden Mills (Nohria, Piper, & Gurtler, 2006), a family-owned textile mill facing bankruptcy in 2001. CEO Feuerstein rebuilt the plant after a 1995 devastating ﬁre. During that time, he paid his idle workers while he rebuilt his plant to provide employment for all his workers, even though only some parts of the mill were proﬁtable. Some of his managers, including Fitzpatrick, the chief of one of the proﬁtable lines, were skeptical about his plan and suggested changes in production and automation. Feuerstein opposed such ideas, expressed distrust of machines and suggested that he had the responsibility to keep his loyal workers employed. He ﬁred Fitzpatrick and executed his own plan. By the end of 2001, however, the accumulated losses forced him to ﬁle for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Before the adoption of the GVV curriculum, students — put in a position of an employee of a potential investor into Malden Mills in 2001 — were asked to write a memo to their senior executive team, arguing against making an investment of any

Giving Voice to Values

129

kind, balancing ﬁnancial and non-ﬁnancial reasons. With the adoption of the GVV, the assignment changed. The students are put in the shoes of Fitzpatrick in the days following the ﬁre in 1995 and are asked to persuade Feuerstein that her recommendations are not only economically viable but also socially responsible. The students are prompted to think about the reasons and rationalizations that Fitzpatrick will need to address, consider the stakes of each party, and ﬁnd arguments and levers Fitzpatrick can use to inﬂuence Feuerstein. The students also consider Feuerstein’s likely responses and how to address them. The memos, due at the beginning of the class, ensure that the students think about their arguments on their own before engaging in a group discussion. By stepping into Fitzpatrick’s shoes, students get an opportunity to practice everything that they learned about GVV throughout the curriculum. The case discussion goes well beyond GVV. It considers ﬁduciary responsibility and creditors, the social role of bankruptcy, the soundness of Feuerstein’s decision to rebuild the mill and the alternatives to that course of action, and the assessment of Feuerstein’s rationale and factors that inﬂuenced his decision. With the beneﬁt of hindsight, the students tend to agree that his decision was short-sighted and suboptimal. At this point, the professor engages the students in a role play based on the GVV framework. Two volunteers at a time — one as Fitzpatrick and another as Feuerstein — engage in a discussion in which Fitzpatrick voices her values to convince Feuerstein to change and modernize Malden Mills. Since students wrote down their arguments in their memos, they know how to begin, but their ‘‘Feuerstein’’ may respond differently than they anticipated, requiring them to think on their feet. The main insight that usually emerges from the discussion is the false dichotomy that Feuerstein perceives between the concern for employees and ﬁnancial concerns. Students come up with speciﬁc ways for Fitzpatrick to appeal to Feuerstein to make a ﬁnancially sound decision in a way that resonates with his concern for employees. Instead of paying idle employees, he may want to use money to retrain them and help them ﬁnd jobs elsewhere, while making sure that the mill has a sustainable business model that will secure the jobs to a subset of his former employees for the long run.

6.2.7.

The Impact of GVV on SOM Faculty and Students

In December 2009, the SOM faculty again held its biannual AoL Workshop and again read the Malden Mills’ papers from the LGA course. This time, the faculty was pleased with its assessed outcomes. While in 2007, only 45% of students linked ethics and values to their recommendations, in 2009, 84% of students who had the full GVV curriculum did so. Also important is the change in consideration of various stakeholders. In 2007, 76% of students considered a broad range of stakeholders’ interests and in 2009, a full 89% did so. With the adoption of GVV, the assessment of learning expanded to include how well students anticipate and address Feuerstein’s reasons, how effectively they counter them, and how persuasively they write. Large

130

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

proportions of students met these quality standards in 2009 (79%, 74%, and 79%, respectively). Perhaps most telling is the observation of the faculty member who taught LGA before and after the integration of GVV, that all students’ papers are more persuasive using the GVV curriculum. It is easy to postulate that the greater clarity in faculty’s teaching makes students’ learning easier and more effective. Like many schools, the SOM needs to work constantly to integrate its silo, discipline-based MBA curriculum. Through the years faculty have tried various techniques: exchanged lists and talked about cases taught in their respective courses; made all MBA core courses’ syllabi accessible on eLearning; and gathered in discipline-based and cross-discipline sub-groups to map out threads of the curriculum around important topics, particularly related to the school’s mission. The GVV curriculum, notably, with its breath of disciplinary materials and sound, speciﬁed methodology now integrates the teaching about values across the MBA curriculum, an important factor in a school with mission-driven faculty. It is the powerful and straight-forward approach to teach about values that allows the GVV curriculum to serve as an integrative mechanism. Each faculty member knows, for example, that other faculty will ask consistent values-related questions in each respective discipline. Discussions of dilemmas inherent in each discipline reinforce the usefulness of the GVV approach, and reassure faculty that students will exit its MBA Program able to be leaders who have a voice and who know how to voice their values in difﬁcult situations. GVV’s pragmatic approach to conversations about conﬂicting values also allows faculty who are not trained as ethicists to hold savvy discussions about sensitive topics. Most of SOM’s faculty has had minimal formal training in ethics. One colleague, for example, took one college course in political philosophy and a short, ethics-related module in his MBA program; this preparation is typical for faculty who now feel empowered to hold important conversation with students. In addition to faculty’s positive responses to the GVV curriculum, students have also engaged enthusiastically with the curriculum. First, there is the enthusiastic involvement of students in classroom discussions and activities. Across the courses, there are inevitably more willing students than there is time for them to deliver their scripts and get feedback from their peers. This willingness to practice publicly and then to receive feedback from a large number of people speaks to students’ consideration of the importance of the process and the topic. In addition, some students have been public about their gratitude to engage with the GVV curriculum. In August 2009, after only one year of the SOM’s adoption of the GVV curriculum, the students’ selected commencement speaker talked eloquently about her reaction to the impact of the GVV curriculum on her perception of leadership and ethical dilemmas.

6.3. Conclusion The premise of the GVV curriculum and pedagogy is that faculty can share lessons and create opportunities for students to practice — to literally pre-script and

Giving Voice to Values

131

rehearse — effective ways to voice and enact their best values and their best selves in the workplace. And they can do this in a rigorous, pragmatic, and skill-based fashion, without requiring faculty to assume a preaching stance that is likely to trigger resistance in students and discomfort, at best, in faculty. The idea here is not that there is an assurance that voicing and enacting one’s values will always work but that it is more likely to be effective if students have gathered data, examined best practices, and rehearsed their approach, with the input of other students and faculty as peer coaches. After all, studying marketing, for example, does not ensure that every new product launch will be a smashing success, but it hopefully raises the odds. And even though there are no guarantees in life, the GVV approach does create for students the experience of having a cohort who are all engaged in the same endeavor — ﬁguring out the most effective way to voice their values. Students leave this classroom with the sense that they are not necessarily alone in caring about values, and with the pragmatic perspective that although success is never a sure thing, it is unquestionably important to try to ﬁnd ways to engage in values-driven leadership. The examples shared above from both undergraduate and MBA contexts illustrate the many ways that this ﬂexible pedagogy can be adapted for use with different populations, and they demonstrate that GVV is accessible and useful for the individual faculty member who wants to insert one session in his or her class, as well as for the institution that determines to integrate this action-oriented approach across the entire curriculum, or to create a dedicate core or elective course. Faculty can use the already developed GVV materials or they can simply modify the teaching plans for their favorite traditional cases. And some faculty work with their students to generate additional, custom GVV materials based on their own experiences. Finally there are scholars designing empirical studies to assess the impact of this approach in teaching and in practice. The faculty and students at William & Mary University and Simmons College are part of an ever-expanding community of scholars and practitioners who are thinking, experimenting, and working to ﬁnd ways to integrate integrity into the practice of management. This is a community that spans numerous boundaries: the silos of disciplines; the separation of colleges and university; and national boundaries as faculty from the USA, China, India, and elsewhere, work with and expand the boundaries of the GVV curriculum. The GVV approach inspires faculty and students to be creative in how they think about their curriculum, while at the same time the community allows and encourages them to learn from one another. For example, in reading the William and Mary’s section in this chapter, the faculty at Simmons College will now use ‘‘The Tale of Two Stories’’ (Gentile, 2010b) in their undergraduate curriculum in spring 2011. It is this wholesale permission to both use what is available and to create new curriculum that inspires faculty and reassures them simultaneously. Perhaps most importantly, students remember the GVV curriculum. The Simmons College student 2009 commencement speaker writes, two years later, that when she is in meetings and there is conﬂict about the company’s direction and

132

Christopher P. Adkins et al.

values, she no longer shrinks from debate. In fact, she now feels empowered to enter the fray and she writes: This can be very intimidating, because my colleagues are all very bright, and experts in their functional areas. Many of them have longer tenure, more institutional knowledge and higher corporate roles and titles than I do. The ‘Giving Voice to Values Curriculum’ often comes to my mind and gives me the conﬁdence to stay strong and true to my feelings. I ﬁnd that in almost every case, others agree with me, and become vocal after I’ve opened the door. Frequently, my colleagues complement me after the fact for being ﬁrm and tell me that they felt the same way, but didn’t want to rock the boat. What better testimony to the power of teaching ‘‘how’’ — rather than ‘‘whether’’ — to voice and enact ones’ values? Finally one of the most engaging aspects of the GVV approach is its marriage of creativity, innovative thinking, and an action orientation with values-driven leadership. In this way, future managers and leaders emerge with the ability to not only know what is right, but the skills, the conﬁdence and the practice that enables them to make it happen.

References Blake-Beard, S., O’Neill, R., Ingols, C., & Shapiro, M. (2010). Social sustainability, ﬂexible work arrangements, and diverse women. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(5), 408–425. Center for Business Education (2008). Where will they lead? Aspen, CO: Aspen Institute. Ford Foundation. (2002). Brieﬂy noted: Business ethics after Enron. Retrieved from http:// fordfound.org/publications/ff_report/ Gentile, M. C. (2010a). Ways of thinking about our values in the workplace. Retrieved from http://www.GivingVoicetoValues.org Gentile, M. C. (2010b). A tale of two stories. Retrieved from http://www.GivingVoicetoValues. org Gentile, M. C. (2010c). Giving voice to values: How to speak your mind when you know what’s right. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Gentile, M. C. (2010d). Keeping your colleagues honest. Harvard Business Review, 88(2), 114–117. Gentile, M. C. (2010e). Is this my place?ySpeaking ‘‘UP’’ (A). Retrieved from http:// www.GivingVoicetoValues.org Gentile, M. C. (2010f). Reasons and rationalizations. Retrieved from http://www.Giving VoicetoValues.org Gentile, M. C. (2010g). Personal-professional proﬁle. Retrieved from http://www.Giving VoicetoValues.org Gentile, M. C. (2010h). Framing a life story. Retrieved from http://www.GivingVoiceto Values.org

Giving Voice to Values

133

Gentile, M. C. (2010i). The client who fell through the cracks. Retrieved from http://www. GivingVoicetoValues.org Haidt, J. (2006). The happiness hypothesis. New York, NY: Basic Books. Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating intuition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kidder, R. M. (2005). Moral courage. New York, NY: William Morrow. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lang, I. H. (2010, April 14). Have women shattered the glass ceiling? USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-04-15-column15_ST1_N.htm McCoy, B. H. (1997). The parable of the Sadhu. Harvard Business Review, 75(3), 54–64. Mobley, M. E., & Humphreys, J. (2006). How low will you go? Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 33–44. Nohria, N., Piper, T., & Gurtler, B. (2006). Malden Mills (A), Harvard Business School Case 9-404-072. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Paine, L. S. (2007). Ethics: A basic framework, Harvard Business School Note 9-307-059. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Shapiro, M., Ingols, C., & Gentile, M. (2011). Helen Drinan (Cases A & B). Case Research Journal, 31(2) (Forthcoming). Shapiro, M., Ingols, C., O’Neill, R., & Blake-Beard, S. (2009). Making sense of women as career self-agents: Implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(4), 477–501. Trefalt, S., Merrill-Sands, D., Kolb, D., Wilson, F., & Carter, S. (2010). Closing the women’s leadership gap: Who can help? Center for Gender in Organizations, Simmons School of Management. CGO Insights, (32). Tulving, E., & Markowitsch, H. J. (1998). Episodic and declarative memory: Role of the hippocampus. Hippocampus, 8(3), 198–204. Van Dissel, B., Margolis, J., & Kanji, A. (2004). Martha McCaskey, Harvard Business School Case 9-403-114. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.

Chapter 7

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity Tony Simons, Kevin Basik and Hannes Leroy

Abstract Purpose — The purpose of this chapter is to describe the function and practical mechanisms that promote behavioral integrity (BI) in individuals and organizations. Speciﬁcally, four prescriptive areas of focus are offered to foster positive and sustained change in BI: How to motivate, equip, follow-up, and provide a context for lasting integrity change. Design/methodology/approach — A framework is presented to describe the essential mechanisms for emphasizing and enhancing BI. Recommended techniques are offered for those developing their own or others’ integrity. Practical implications — This chapter identiﬁes speciﬁc actionable approaches to enhance one of the most fundamental and critical elements in any trust-based relationship: integrity. This chapter provides the ‘‘how to’’ with regard to strengthening and consistently acting in accordance with one’s commitments, values, and promises. Originality/value — Research has consistently demonstrated the measurable impact of BI perceptions on key outcomes. This chapter clariﬁes the processes, systems, techniques, and other factors that elevate integrity.

At the start of our class, we typically ask students to write down and rank-order the ﬁve most important dimensions they consider when evaluating effective leadership. Leader integrity almost always comes out as the single most valued dimension to be an effective leader. However, when we then ask students how many leaders they currently know who have integrity, the number zero is by far the most common answer. — Interview with Len Crowley, Executive director, PLI Global, an international ethics training company

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

136

Tony Simons et al.

Most people agree, regardless of context, that integrity is critical for effective leadership. As an example, the 2010 Service Academy Consortium on Character Assessment (representing the US Air Force, Naval, Military, Merchant Marine, and Coast Guard Academies) identiﬁed integrity as the most important character dimension for development in future military ofﬁcers. Similarly, when workers in different industries and settings are asked what they look for in a leader, the notion of integrity repeatedly comes to the top (e.g., Kouzes & Posner, 2003). Yet despite its importance — experiences like Crowley’s are common — people are painfully aware of the absence of integrity among the leaders in their lives, and this absence has a cost. This phenomenon begs the question, ‘‘If we (including those who eventually ﬁnd themselves in leadership positions) know how important integrity is, why is impeccable leader integrity so rarely demonstrated?’’ We suggest it is because practicing and conveying integrity are challenging behaviors for individuals to maintain. Nevertheless, we share a deep-rooted belief that the behaviors that enhance leader integrity are learnable and teachable. This chapter presents a framework for operationalizing integrity and offers recommendations for enhancing and sustaining it over time. Not surprisingly, scholars disagree in their deﬁnitions of integrity, which has only served to slow the discourse on how best to develop it (Palanski & Yammarino, 2007). The dictionary deﬁnes integrity as consistent adherence to an accepted set of moral values. However, a second, related deﬁnition can also be useful: integrity is a state of seamlessness or wholeness. The hull of a boat has integrity when it has no gaps or leaks, ensuring its functionality. In this chapter, we extend this second deﬁnition and align it with the construct of behavioral integrity (BI). BI can be deﬁned as the perceived pattern of alignment between leaders’ words and action. It is further operationalized as how consistently the target actors (i.e., leaders) keep their promises and enact their espoused values. More simply stated, leader BI is about the extent to which leaders are perceived to ‘‘walk their talk,’’ ‘‘practice what they preach,’’ and ‘‘live by their word’’ (Simons, 2002, 2008). Empirical research has demonstrated a strong impact of BI on both organizational and individual behavior and performance outcomes (Simons, Tomlinson, & Leroy, 2011). This construct differs from most conceptions of integrity in that it explicitly excludes moral content from consideration — it simply focuses on the alignment between words and actions. While we believe that the content of values that a person lives by is extremely important, this chapter focuses on the question of how to help people more consistently align their words and their actions — an aspect of integrity that we assert is critical for good leadership. The facts that BI does not reference any particular moral code and has empirically demonstrated strong performance implications combine to make it an especially potent framework for teaching ethics. In applying this framework, we consider the scarcity of leaders with an impeccable word to be due to shortfalls of skill and focus rather than of ‘‘character.’’ This understanding renders integrity very trainable, given appropriate contextual supports. The BI framework offers an approach to learning ethics that is positive and practical in orientation and that speaks even to students who may see little or no inherent value in pursuing ethical behavior. This approach does not

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

137

invoke shame in the way other approaches might because it focuses on effectiveness rather than rectitude, and on learnable behaviors rather than character. As a result, it makes current personal shortfalls more readily discussable without defensiveness. BI is a perceived pattern of alignment — and, as such, it may usefully be broken down into components. There is the actual level of values alignment and promissory follow-through that a leader tends to demonstrate over time. This pattern of behavior forms the basis for others’ perceptions, and is a critical area for intervention. Then there is a second component, which is occasionally more critical: the actor must communicate well enough that observers notice and experience the actor as demonstrating high values alignment and promissory follow-through. Commitments must be explicitly discussed, and their completion acknowledged. Similarly, decisions must be explained in terms of their values alignment, and so forth. Integrity is a subjectively perceived phenomenon, but the perception is based upon an objective reality. Both objective and subjective components represent areas for potential habit and skill acquisition with the goal of raising integrity levels. Our aim is to support people in better living by their word, and in communicating effectively so that others perceive this alignment as well. Raising integrity levels, as we understand the challenge, is ultimately about changing behavior. We seek to enhance the extent to which students or clients (e.g., teachers, managers, and leaders) deliver on promises and demonstrate espoused values, and also to more skillfully manage others’ perceptions of these traits. The events to which the integrity question applies are ubiquitous — as people interact to get things done, they are constantly making commitments. Thus, the requisite behavioral changes are profound and far-reaching. Based on personal experiences of teaching BI for managers and graduate and undergraduate students, which we further conﬁrmed through discussions with several executive trainers and coaches, we assert that four things are needed to create lasting integrity change: First and most importantly, the learner must be positively motivated to pay attention and to struggle through the awkwardness that usually accompanies the learning of new approaches to frequent interactions and processes. Since the context of this approach focuses on one’s integrity, the learner must be willing to be selfcritical, have a mindset oriented toward growth and development, and seek to understand the perceptions of others. Second, the learner must become equipped with speciﬁc skills and habits to support change. Learners must embrace new habitual procedures for making and asking for commitments, for follow-through and transparency. They must also develop their awareness of ambivalences, values, and habits that undermine their ability to consistently deliver on promises. This skill and awareness development is the meat of the lesson plan, but it must be well motivated because change is not easy. Third, there must be a system for follow-up and ongoing encouragement because change takes time and sustained attention. Absent follow-up, the best-delivered package of motivation and equipment will fail to become integrated into the learner’s daily (and hourly) routine. Consequently, there needs to be a system for getting learners back on track when the learning and practice become inconvenient or uncomfortable — as they inevitably will.

138

Tony Simons et al.

Fourth, the change effort must be supported and reinforced by a larger organizational context. Too often, features in the immediate and broader organizational environment undermine what would otherwise be a successful program of change or development. Indeed, even the most well-intentioned individuals will be challenged to maintain their word-deed alignment in a system that includes hypocritical leaders or supervisors, middle managers who are ambivalent about the policies they espouse and enforce, and/or policies that provide perverse incentives and so reward behaviors that run counter to espoused values and goals. Such contextual factors will bring into question leadership commitment to the principles of integrity, and will generate cynicism and a pull toward low integrity. Support from the larger organizational context is further important as it combines and strengthens each of the three preceding steps.

7.1. Motivate We established earlier that BI is anything but an easy task. It involves confronting personal demons, noticing and changing well-established but dysfunctional habits, learning new skills and attitudes, and — most difﬁcult of all — maintaining behavioral change over time. Therefore, overcoming these challenges and enhancing integrity calls for considerable motivational and emotional resources. In this section, we distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic motives for integrity and positive and negative emotions supporting these motives. When we integrate these two dimensions — intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, and positive and negative emotions — the following matrix emerges (Figure 7.1, see also Elliot & McGregor, 2001). All four of these cells can be useful in creating behavioral change. Extrinsic motivation may be particularly useful in the early stages of behavioral change programs, in that they are easy to target and provide immediate gratiﬁcation for the learner. In contrast, intrinsic motives are more sustainable. The two forms of motivation can peacefully coexist. Similarly, both approach and avoidance (i.e., ‘‘pull’’ and ‘‘push’’, respectively) motives have their place and time. The often-used Positive emotions

Intrinsic motivation

Extrinsic motivation

Negative emotions

Intrinsic approach motivation

Intrinsic avoidance motivation

(Self-driven pursuit of the benefits of high BI)

(Self-driven avoidance of the costs of low BI)

Extrinsic approach motivation

Extrinsic avoidance motivation

(Externally-driven pursuit of the benefits of high BI)

(Externally-driven avoidance of the costs of low BI)

Figure 7.1: Types of motivation for integrity change.

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

139

change management analogy of the ‘‘burning platform’’ (Embley, 2005, p. 1) argues that some people engage in change because they are drawn to the new future (i.e., leaping toward something), while others only change because staying the same becomes uncomfortably ‘‘hot’’ (i.e., leaping away from something). The distinction between ‘‘pull’’ and ‘‘push’’ or approach and avoidance motives is important because ethics are so often framed as a way to avoid legal and reputational problems — which creates an avoidance motive. Boyatzis (2008) discussed approach and avoidance motives in terms of ‘‘positive and negative emotional attractors,’’ which are associated with parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous system arousal, respectively. Positive emotional attractors involve contemplation of aspirations and desired outcomes, while negative emotional attractors involve shame and fear of undesired outcomes. Positive emotional attractors — approach motives — are associated with parasympathetic nervous system arousal and with successful development of new neural pathways, or learning. Negative emotional attractors, on the other hand — avoidance motives — stimulate sympathetic ﬁght-or-ﬂight arousal and so actively inhibit higher cognitive functioning, the growth of new neural pathways, and learning. Boyatzis’ research suggests that most ethical or integrity training is framed in a way that inhibits thought, learning, and integration of the lessons into new behavioral patterns. Integrity must be discussed as a positive aspiration — and ultimately as a performance enhancer — to create an approach motivation, a positive emotional attractor, and ultimately, effective cognitive and behavioral learning.

7.1.1.

Extrinsic Motivation

Motivating people to focus on and enhance their BI can be accomplished with both approach and avoidance approaches. Fear of negative consequences can be powerful to initiate movement, but may only nudge them to the nearest safe spot. We believe that such a negative focus inhibits the reﬂection and thought needed to change behavior for the long term, and so encourage educators to focus on building positive, approach-based, motivation for integrity change. By contrast, many companies and schools seem to implement integrity enhancement practices based on extrinsic avoidance motivation. They seek to avoid legal and reputational damage that often results from patterns of unethical behavior, as opposed to being ‘‘pulled’’ toward something engaging and elevating associated with integrity-based performance. While negative emotional attractors play a role in the ‘‘unfreezing’’ process of change, effective integrity enhancement entails shifting participants toward positive motivation. Fortunately, the BI framework facilitates such a shift. As noted earlier, BI uses morally neutral language that reduces negative feelings such as defensiveness and shame, and allows productive discussion and reﬂection to develop skills and habits rather than striving to build ‘‘moral ﬁber.’’ The BI framework has generated a body of empirical studies that demonstrate concrete, measurable personal and organizational performance beneﬁts to be

140

Tony Simons et al.

attained through integrity enhancement. For example, Simons (2008) demonstrated that hotel managers who were seen as walking their talk reaped an ‘‘integrity dividend’’ of signiﬁcantly superior customer satisfaction and business unit proﬁtability. Research further clariﬁes how individuals — in particular leaders — reap these positive rewards (Simons et al., 2011). When leaders maintain BI, they communicate more clearly and they build stronger relationships (Simons, 2008). As a result, followers perform better in their job and are more likely to engage in extrarole behaviors, such as helping others or promoting a positive image of the organization (Palanski & Yammarino, 2011). In addition, research has shown that BI improves the relationship with other organizational stakeholders: other departments or peers, customers, suppliers, and unions — all of which enhance performance (Simons et al., 2011).

7.1.2.

Intrinsic Motivation

In addition to these extrinsic motivations, it is important to highlight that there are also intrinsic motivations for wanting to develop BI. Festinger (1962) noted that there is an inherent striving for consistency as individuals experience unpleasant dissonance when they experience a misalignment between their attitudes and actions. To the extent that people voice (or subvocalize) their attitudes, this dissonance will drive them to increase BI. Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) further posits that individuals have an inherent striving for integrity as the integration of the psychological elements of the self in a uniﬁed whole and the integration of the individuals into the larger social environment. In the next section, we elaborate how leader integrity may result from a more integrated identity. Milton, Simons, and Leroy (2011) built on the self-discrepancy and regulatory focus literature (Higgins, 1987, 1997) to argue that BI may arise from a lack of congruence between the actual self (who you are), the ought self (who you believe you ought to be), and the ideal self (who you want to be). Discrepancies between actual and ideal selves lead to disappointment and dissatisfaction arising from dreams left unfulﬁlled and an approach motivation concerned with (i.e., being ‘‘pulled toward’’) advancement, growth, and accomplishment. In contrast, discrepancies between actual and ought selves lead to fear, guilt, self-contempt and uneasiness, and an avoidance motivation concerned with (i.e., ‘‘pushed away from’’) protection, safety, and responsibility. Self-discrepancies can thus make individuals intrinsically motivated to develop BI by highlighting the gap between who they are and who they aspire to be or who they should be. Several training tools may be used to highlight the gap between these different selves and so increase intrinsic motivation. Combining self-assessment and peer assessment may be particularly interesting because it not only provides individuals with motivation to change but also provides some insight into perceived misalignment. Both empirical and practical knowledge conﬁrm that others often do not perceive us in the same way we perceive ourselves. Because BI is difﬁcult to

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

141

maintain, individuals often ﬁnd large discrepancies between how they perceive their own BI and how peers, subordinates, and supervisors perceive their BI. Highlighting the gap can be very disconcerting but also highly motivating for change. As a simple example, one of the authors recently interviewed his wife regarding his patterns of promise keeping, and learned of a few minor home repair projects that he had agreed to and then put off. While that breach might seem trivial, it nonetheless represented an impediment to trust in an undeniably important relationship. The interview successfully motivated change. Individuals also learn simply by observing others (Bandura, 1977). In observing role models who score high on BI, they see what kinds of behaviors, emotions, or thoughts are desired, and thus construct a best practice or a new ‘‘ideal self.’’ Of course, individuals can be inspired by famous examples of leaders who have demonstrated high integrity (e.g., Gandhi and Mandela), but ideally their role model should be someone closer to home, someone they can personally relate to, talk to, and model in the same context. This recommendation highlights an important yet unsettling challenge for anyone in the role of developing/training others in BI — they must maintain an impeccable word because trainees implicitly see the trainer as someone who should be a positive example and role model of word-deed alignment. Highlighting the gap between different selves may also occur because of a signiﬁcant event or moment in one’s life or one’s career (Roberts, Dutton, Spreitzer, Heapy, & Quinn, 2005). These ‘‘trigger moments’’ can happen spontaneously (e.g., departure of a spouse or career change) or can be induced in training (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). In addition, designed interventions or exercises can induce jolts as well, such as imagining what individuals say about you at your own funeral, participating in a ﬁre walk to overcome personal fears, having a difﬁcult conversation with a loved one, or countless other activities. Roberts et al. (2005) further argue that for jolting experiences to translate into positive change rather than negative change, one needs the emotional resources to cope with the jolting experience. Those resources may come in the form of positive affect, positive/ supportive interpersonal relationships, and personal agency, or psychological capital in the form of hope, optimism, self-efﬁcacy, and resilience (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). When jolts are induced through training, the educator needs to ensure that sufﬁcient resources exist prior to the exercise by creating an environment where it is psychologically safe to engage in learning (Edmondson, 1999). One context for intentionally creating such ‘‘trigger moments’’ for new selfawareness and integrity development is in challenge experiences. These crucible events (often considered signiﬁcant formative moments for the participants) enable learners to crystallize and develop a vivid body sense of an ‘‘ideal self’’ as they accomplish emotionally charged experiences, such as walking across a bed of hot coals or traversing a gorge on a high-speed zipline. A good trainer can associate the exhilaration and adrenaline that are inherently attached to these activities with the concept of integrity, thus creating a positive challenge: ‘‘Are you man enough/ woman enough for integrity?’’ Indeed, after successfully accomplishing something so far beyond the boundaries of the previously-deﬁned ‘‘possible self,’’ a new appreciation can emerge about one’s ability to control their actions and, in turn,

142

Tony Simons et al.

their word-deed alignment. Such an approach is a far cry from a traditional ethics discussion or lecture forum. However, it may well provide a more effective motivational context for generating lasting behavioral change.

7.1.3.

Conclusion

In concluding this section, we propose that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are important in developing BI. Whereas extrinsic motivation is perhaps more important to get individuals over the initial threshold to consider the importance of BI, intrinsic motivation is important to have individuals identify with more personal beneﬁts to striving for alignment, and thus helps create sustained change. The tension between approach and avoidance motivation for integrity change is more problematic. While many programs are driven at the organization level by negative avoidance motives such as the fear or cost of scandal and illegality, positive approach motives are far more supportive of higher cognitive functioning and learning. The BI framework, and the research it has spawned, facilitates redirecting avoidance motives into approach motives by enumerating practical bottom-line performance enhancement beneﬁts and non-shaming language. In the next section, we further discuss how developing selfawareness is an important aspect of equipping individuals to build and maintain BI.

7.2. Equip Motivation is imperative, but is not by itself enough to change a person’s integrity level in a lasting way. Raising integrity levels requires (1) changing dysfunctional habits, (2) cultivating self-awareness, and (3) developing a set of communication skills necessary to become better at aligning words with actions (and being seen as doing so). Learners must address, for example, habits of overcommitment and/or disorganization and communication patterns that allow listeners to hear nonexistent commitments. They must become aware, in an ongoing way, of their own values, ambivalences, and automatic social behaviors that affect their ability to maintain an impeccable word. These learning challenges are substantial, but they are necessary for maintaining BI.

7.2.1.

LearningHabits

Many integrity breaches are a result of people overpromising. The ‘‘offender’’ might have the best of intentions and no manipulative agenda, but might simply overinﬂate their self-concept in the mold of Garrison Keillor’s Lake Wobegon, where ‘‘all the children are above average.’’ Many managers do not like to admit the limits of their power within the organization — that someone other than them has ﬁnal approval authority. Some describe themselves in terms of the values to which they aspire — rather

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

143

than those they actually enact and overpromise that way. For example, a speaker might overpromise out of fear of failure or of disappointing or of looking bad. Managers who describe extreme commitments to customer service or to employee development are often in fact operating from a more complex calculus that factors in costs and proﬁts. Notice that none of these integrity breaches is a result of malice or of poor character. Indeed, there are many noncharacter-based reasons why people act with low BI. The challenge these people face is how to present a more accurate picture without alienating their constituencies. Honest dealings often require greater skill than would a more deceitful approach. The work of David Dunning and colleagues further highlights why assessing one’s own BI might be particularly challenging for individuals (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). This research has shown that individuals are typically bad at assessing their own competence. In general, individuals assume that they are ‘‘above average’’ and that this effect gets worse as individuals are, in fact, less competent. More importantly, this research has also shown that individuals are bad at making predictions about their own behavior (Epley & Dunning, 2000). Epley and Dunning (2006), for example, found that people were systematically worse in evaluating their follow-up on ethical behavior than when they were judging that of others. In other words, individuals systematically thought that they were ‘‘holier than thou.’’ Their results indicate that being bad at making behavioral predictions is not the result of deliberate manipulation but of basic psychological mechanisms such as the inability to use population base rates and the general tendency to assess oneself positively. One key to raising the reliability with which one keeps one’s word is simply to give one’s word more focus and intentionality. People often agree to things casually, without thinking through the commitment they are making. Some people tend to want to say ‘‘yes’’ to others’ demands or requests. They might want to please others, to sell, be liked, or to avoid conﬂict. Simply stated, in order to protect their integrity, these people need to learn to say ‘‘no’’ or to lean into their discomfort — admittedly, not an easy task. Granted, one cannot sidestep this problem simply by refusing ever to give one’s word — promises are the lifeblood of any business dealing or ongoing trust-based relationship. But one can learn to be more deliberate in the giving of one’s promise. Robert Gass teaches people to carefully and soberly consider, before giving a promise, (1) whether one truly wants to make this commitment given the other promises and commitments already on the plate and (2) whether one can, in fact, truly guarantee its delivery. If the answer to either of these questions is ‘‘no,’’ then one needs to negotiate a different deal with the person asking the promise. Catching yourself before you make a poor promise is a habit that requires training and reinforcement. Another necessary, functional element of teaching people to manage their integrity perceptions is learning and using a system for recording, keeping track of, and following up on commitments. It could be a simple paper and pencil to-do list or a smartphone program, or a multi-platform system like one of the authors is currently developing. The essence of making such a system work is using it: marking down every commitment, checking in with the list, noticing when commitments need to be renegotiated, and marking them off when complete. Simply the process of compiling all of one’s promises onto a single list is often a journey of discovery.

144

Tony Simons et al.

When you have worked the list to the point where every commitment on it is on track for delivery, there is an extraordinary sensation of mastery that follows. This recommendation might seem pedestrian, but such a list represents a direct picture of the extent to which the learner is living by his or her word. Even if you make your promises carefully, and follow through like gravity, others might still perceive word-deed misalignment, and so ascribe to you low BI. It is not enough simply to live by one’s word; one must also communicate well enough that people recognize that you are living by your word. We can all recognize that many perceived broken promises are simply the result of misunderstandings. So often, people hear what they want to hear, ﬁlter the message through their biases, attributions, and assumptions, and perceive promises or statements of espoused values that were never intended. For example, if a supervisor tells an employee that she will ‘‘try to get them a raise,’’ the employee may very likely ﬁlter out the word ‘‘try,’’ and will see anything less than success as a broken promise. Instead, more deliberate, intentional language on the part of the supervisor can illuminate the commitment being offered, and can prevent accidental perceptions of word-deed misalignment. Often people are unclear in their requests. For example, does the statement, ‘‘I want this project in my hands by Friday’’ mean ﬁrst thing or end-of-business? Is it a request for a ﬁrst draft or a polished document? Was the request made in a way that allows the respondent to refuse? An agreement absent permission to decline or renegotiate means very little. When the person asked cannot say ‘‘no,’’ then his ‘‘yes’’ is suspect. Clear communication patterns around asking and giving commitments are a powerful tool for raising integrity. The key to establishing these patterns is, again, training, practice, and reinforcement.

7.2.2.

Develop Self-Awareness

In addition to developing new behavioral routines, learners need to develop awareness of their internal mechanisms — particularly those elements that might challenge their integrity. People can enhance their integrity levels by better understanding and tracking their personal values, desires, and wants, while also increasing awareness of how they are perceived by others. Simons (2002) argued that a key precondition for perceived alignment between values espousal and enactment is that managers are actually aware of what drives or motivates them — what they value. If leaders do not fully understand their own personal values before they espouse them to followers, they may ﬁnd that they are unable to, or uninterested in, living up to their espousal. Even when leaders do not intend to deceive their followers, they may unwillingly do so when they deceive themselves. As Shakespeare’s Polonius said in Hamlet: ‘‘To thine own self be true and it shall follow, as the night the day, that thou cannot be false to any other man.’’ In other words, to remain true to others, one most ﬁrst remain true and authentic to oneself (see also Leroy, Palanski, & Simons, 2009).

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

145

As such, a useful step in developing BI is clarifying personal priorities, values, and philosophies. As indicated earlier, this awareness can be achieved through surveys or checklists where managers gain more self-knowledge. Simons (2002) argued that there are perceptual ﬁlters between what leaders do and how they are perceived. Followers may assume that the leader endorses certain values without overtly espousing them, which sets the stage for BI evaluations for which the leader never intended to be accountable. For example, simply by being in the leadership role or through membership in an organization (e.g., military ofﬁcer, church pastor, and school board member), a leader will be considered to have endorsed certain relevant values and promises. Therefore, when the military/church/school board member acts in a way that seems inconsistent with the assumed values, a BI judgment is made, perhaps without the member’s awareness. If any of these members were to be obviously intoxicated, use foul language in public or even cut someone off in trafﬁc, the resultant evaluation may be that the action is inconsistent with the values expected of someone in that position, despite no formal espousal being made. As such, self-reﬂection should examine both the overt and the potentially nonverbalized values and promises that may be evaluated by observers. Similarly, leaders need sufﬁcient empathy and emotional intelligence to know how their actions have an impact on others. In other words, to maintain BI individuals need to develop accurate public self-awareness. There are different ways to develop both private and public self-awareness. We ﬁrst highlight the role of mindfulness (Brown, Ryan, & Creswell, 2007; Dane, 2011) as a vehicle for cultivating one’s awareness and developing one’s ability to direct our attention internally (i.e., one’s thoughts, feelings, intentions, and values) as well as externally (i.e., situational demands, other’s emotions, and desires). This heightened awareness helps us to reduce discrepancies between who we are and what we do. Research has shown that mindfulness supports value clariﬁcation and behavioral selfregulation (Carmody, Baer, Lykins, & Olendzki, 2009; Shapiro, Carlson, Astin, & Freedman, 2006). In other words, in being more mindful, we make more conscious decisions that reﬂect our own personal values and behaviors. Research has shown that mindfulness helps us to become more authentic, more true to ourselves, and experience more self-concordance. For example, Brown and Ryan (2003) found that mindfulness increases the congruency between implicit and explicit affect. Similarly, Koole, Govorun, Cheng, and Gallucci (2009) found that even a small mindfulness induction may increase the congruence between explicit affect and implicit and explicit self-esteem. Mindfulness helps us become aware of when we are rationalizing our actions and are failing to live up to certain commitments. In being more mindful, we are also more attuned to how others will perceive our words (empathy) in that we more easily take the perspective of the other party (Galinsky, Maddux, Gilin, & White, 2008). Perspective talking is a wellestablished leadership exercise that helps individuals become aware not only of someone else’s view on things but also of how this contrasts with your own view (Bass, 2008). Finally, mindfulness may also be particularly valuable in highlighting one’s own habits that make individuals engage in certain BI-destructive behaviors. In essence, mindfulness makes one aware of what one does when one does it (Brown et al., 2007). If someone has the tendency to come up with excuses, and these excuses damage their BI, mindfulness training can help people become more aware of their own habits and change them.

146

Tony Simons et al.

In addition to private self-awareness, it is important to remain open to feedback from others. Indeed, it is the outside party (e.g., peer, subordinate, friend, boss, or spouse) who has command over the BI ascription in the ﬁrst place (Simons, 2002). As a result, it is critically important that we develop self-awareness through social interaction. So often, the external perspective identiﬁes ‘‘blind spots’’ and perceptions of which the leader is unaware. One example of this comes from one of the authors, who served as an instructor of a leadership course at the Air Force Academy. In this course, the instructor introduced the concept of BI, and offered himself up as the semester-long test case in trying to maintain a high level of BI. On the very ﬁrst day, he clearly espoused personal accountability, suggesting that each student had command over his/her grade through his/her effort. In the same lesson, the instructor delivered a brief quiz, using a technique to use mild social pressure to drive student reading: all quizzes would be collected and a randomly selected quiz would be the grade for the whole class. The following lesson, a student privately and respectfully indicated that he perceived the way the quiz was conducted was inconsistent with the stated value for accountability and ownership of one’s grade. The instructor admitted that this perception was something he had never considered, but acknowledged that it was absolutely an example of an ‘‘out of integrity’’ moment. Had the student not felt safe enough to offer the feedback, or the instructor not been receptive to it, the student’s perception of hypocrisy would likely have festered and ultimately created a motivation and trust problem among his classmates. This example demonstrates that other individuals can thus be an important resource to make sure that we stay on the track we set out for ourselves. Leaders who want to maintain BI are wise to actively search feedback from other individuals on their current functioning and remain open and nondefensive to this feedback when it is given. This will not only help leaders to remain on track and aware of their own values but also help foster perceptions of BI in the eye of that particular beholder. By remaining open to critique when someone perceives that a promise has been breached, this person may come to better understand that the value breach was not intentional and thus not downgrade the overall integrity of the person. Such an environment of clear evaluation and open feedback seldom emerges spontaneously in organizations. It requires a climate of trust and psychological safety, which can be fostered through a clear BI ‘‘language’’ and a clear demonstration of receptivity to feedback. In this regard, Leroy, Halbesleben, Savage, and Simons (2010) demonstrated that leader BI is an antecedent to a team environment where it is psychologically safe to speak up and admit mistakes.

7.2.3.

Communication Skills

In addition to developing habits of careful commitment and self-awareness, highintegrity leaders must communicate adeptly. Political skill represents ‘‘the ability to effectively understand others at work, and to use such knowledge to inﬂuence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives’’

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

147

(Ferris et al., 2005b, p. 127). This competency has been described as fundamental to inﬂuence in the management of work and interpersonal relationships (Ferris, Munyon, Basik, & Buckley, 2008), and provides leaders with a skill set for identifying, minimizing, or managing word-deed misalignment events. Exploratory research has also provided evidence that managers’ political skill is an antecedent to subordinates’ ratings of the managers’ BI (Basik, 2010). Political skill has four distinct dimensions (Ferris et al., 2007): social astuteness, interpersonal inﬂuence, networking ability, and apparent sincerity. Competence in these areas allows politically skilled managers to approach ambiguous situations with a heightened ability to ‘‘tune into cues regarding constituents’ expectations, and thus readily detect discrepancies in expectations and evaluations’’ (Tsui & Ashford, 1994, p. 106). This skill allows such managers to anticipate, identify, and manage potential BI problems that less politically skilled individuals may miss. Leaders with high political skill may also be better able to facilitate the kind of communication that reduces the probability of word-deed misalignment events from occurring (or being perceived as having occurred). Cha and Edmondson (2006, p. 59) found that ‘‘leaders with strong values may be earnest in their intention to behave authentically, but their followers may not perceive them this way.’’ In their study, employees often did not openly raise concerns about inconsistent behavior with the managers, and poorly performing managers either were not sensitive to environmental cues or were uncomfortable in actively seeking feedback in a sincere manner from trusted sources. Similarly, Ceasar, Ferris, and Perrewe´ (2005) argued that authentic leadership and leader political skills work together to foster follower perceptions of trust and credibility and reputation. Perhaps one of the most interesting application-based aspects of political skill is that, although it is reasonably consistent across situations and is largely inﬂuenced by stable characteristics and personality dimensions, it is conceptualized as a trainable skill (see Ferris et al., 2007 for antecedent list). Scholars suggest that political skill can be developed through self-assessment, experiential (e.g., personal or vicarious learning and dramaturgical) exercises, mentoring, and evaluation and feedback (Blass & Ferris, 2007; Ferris et al., 2005a). Mentoring or coaching relationships that focus on clear communication, networking skills, appreciation for social and emotional cues, and emotional regulation can also advance one’s comfort with these critical dimensions.

7.2.4.

Conclusion

In summary, we argue that certain techniques and skills can equip individuals to develop and practice BI. These include establishing a clear, intentional framework for making and asking commitments, keeping track and following through, promoting communication through trusting, morality-neutral language, and promoting the development of political skill. In addition, we suggest it is important to maintain both private and public self-awareness by being staying present-minded

148

Tony Simons et al.

and engaging in authentic leadership behaviors. These recommendations can promote an engaging climate that sets in motion a new type of relational exchange. However, to create sustained integrity change, one must commit to a more sustained program. In the next section, we will discuss ways to follow-up on the BI development to ensure more lasting change.

7.3. Follow-Up All the motivation in the world, and all the very best of tools, will, for most people, fail to create lasting change if they are not coupled with follow-up. Changing behavioral routines — especially subtle ones about how you deal with people — is a difﬁcult process. It invariably includes fumbles, missteps, and backslides. People need support in order to continue to drive the change process forward. They need to be reminded of the priority placed on integrity, they need to be held accountable for completing exercises and learning new habits of commitment and follow-through, and they need encouragement. Life is complicated, and other priorities will certainly challenge the efforts of a new integrity enthusiast. Support is what allows integrity to compete in the face of those competing priorities. While follow-up is important for any behavioral change to be successful, we would argue that it is especially important for the success of BI. While confronting your reasons for engaging in BI development and learning new skills and habits can be difﬁcult, maintaining one’s integrity may be the most important challenge of all. Similar to trust, once broken, BI is not easy to repair. Maintaining integrity is thus an ongoing challenge for individuals. Circumstances can often change quickly such that keeping promises may be costly, impractical, or even impossible. Managers are, almost by deﬁnition, very busy, they are frequently focused on performance, and they are often in the business of ‘‘putting out ﬁres’’ or handling crises. For this reason, it is important to have support structures in place to help managers maintain focus on BI. Support can take many forms, and, ideally, multiple forms of support can backstop each other to prevent participants from losing change momentum and/or slipping back into dysfunctional habits. The support can come in the form of routine conversations with a coach, or a circle of like-minded peers, or simply a colleague who serves as an accountability partner. Specialized integrity enhancement software can reinforce change efforts by facilitating accountability, though it may be inherently limited at addressing social needs. The functions of follow-up are (1) to refocus attention on the challenge of growing personal and organizational integrity, (2) to recommit to meeting that challenge — especially in the face of slippage, (3) to point out blind spots and patterns that diminish integrity, (4) to provide additional skills as needed, and (5) to provide a social incentive and encouragement in taking on this most difﬁcult and profound of challenges. Any effective effort to create lasting personal or organizational change in integrity must include a mechanism for follow-up. The simplest mechanism is simply to assign

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

149

participants partners with whom they must discuss their daily integrity challenges in on a weekly or biweekly basis. Assignments and discussion questions could be provided for each conversation. While it is simplest to implement, this mechanism will allow some participants to slip through the cracks or to collude in devaluing or dismissing the material. Creating circles of ﬁve or six with the same structure is a more reliable method of follow-up support, as such groups will create social pressure against cynical dismissal. Larger follow-up circles might have an assigned coach or a designated facilitator. Such circles might also have a volunteer who will represent the group members’ challenges to a skilled facilitator at an additional troubleshooting conference call. The most expensive and versatile method of follow-up — appropriate where resources are available and other factors might make one of the other methods impractical — is personalized coaching. The key to any follow-up is simply to ﬁnd a way to keep integrity top-of-mind as a focal point. A second form of follow-up support — which may be considered as a potential supplement — is accountability software. While there are many time management and to-do list manager programs, we envision software that is tailored to increasing integrity levels within this framework. As such, it would remind participants about deliberate processes for making and breaking commitments, keep track of and remind participants about commitments while informing accountability partners about the status of these commitments, query satisfaction levels with commitment fulﬁllments, track numbers of commitments made and fulﬁlled, and perhaps offer coaching videos targeted to displayed patterns. Such work, undertaken by one of the authors, is in its infancy, but it represents a promising direction. A third form of follow-up is to ensure that the exercises during any BIdevelopmental effort are transferable enough to practice. As we noted earlier, the developmental context needs to be positive and safe to learn new behaviors and skills. However, this context should not create a utopian environment that stands in sharp contrast with the day-to-day reality of maintaining BI. We see two methods to enhance the transfer of BI-developmental practices: First, in the training the exercises need to be as realistic and as practically applicable as possible. Second, after the training the trainee needs to be supported by the larger organizational context to implement their newfound skills. We focus on this in more detail in the next section. In conclusion to this section, we want to reemphasize the importance of follow-up for the inherent challenges related to BI. Because perfect BI is so difﬁcult to attain, anyone is going to face disappointment along the way. Meeting these disappointments head-on and acknowledging that these disappointments do not speak to your character but to your skill is important to remain motivated.

7.4. Manage the Larger Organizational Context Because much of this chapter describes BI development in an organizational context, whether a school, military unit, or a business, we would be remiss not to recognize the broader organizational features that can contribute to BI enhancement success

150

Tony Simons et al.

and failure. Anyone’s ability to effectively learn to demonstrate high BI will be inﬂuenced by factors such as the history of integrity in the organization, the reward structures in place, the hierarchical alignment of values in the organization, the consistency of upper management guidance, and even the modeled behavior of upper management themselves. Organizational culture and norms can create both formal and informal pressures that can undermine BI at the individual level. Simple behaviors such as poor punctuality, missed meetings, and tolerance for promise breaking can set the stage for desensitization to BI breaches. Anyone who has waited hours past a scheduled cable or telephone company appointment can attest to the impact of a culture of tolerance for such actions, regardless of all the customer service values they espouse. In that culture, it is no surprise that the service technicians (when they ﬁnally show up) are not particularly concerned with broken appointments. Conversely, cultures such as Southwest Airlines that both formally and informally support and expect actions in alignment with their values seem to naturally produce individual actions that exemplify BI. In the same way, an organization’s reward system can easily encourage or even discourage BI enhancement. Bonuses, incentives, and performance appraisals should clearly align with the values espoused by the organization, lest they run the risk of ‘‘rewarding A while hoping for B’’ (Kerr, 1975). For example, Simons (2008) spotlighted a Boeing executive who directly linked the company’s value of employee morale with the performance appraisal system. In one instance, an abusive manager who ignored the corporate focus on morale was penalized a third of his bonus for not aligning with the company value. Similarly, when Brigham Young University removed a star athlete from the basketball team for premarital sex (a violation of the school’s honor code), it sent a clear and consistent message about the integrity of the school with regard to its espoused values. Conversely, a major hotel once implemented an unconditional money-back guarantee for its customers as a way to enhance service quality — but they then incentivized hotel managers to minimize the number of refunds given (causing them to renege on the guarantee). It took a major change effort to remedy the reputation damage wrought by this perverse incentive. So often, organizations proclaim values that they undermine with their own incentive programs. In these cases, the ends are rewarded, while the means — often proclaimed loudly in the company values — are noticeably disregarded. In such an environment, individuals trying to elevate their own BI are operating in a system that encourages and models just the opposite. Simons (2008) also described those recurring situations where managers must espouse, and perhaps even champion, initiatives and values with which they disagree. This ‘‘middle manager’s dilemma’’ can result in frustration, callousness, and even decrease in effort. The requirement to compromise one’s own consistency may also result in ambivalence about their charge, ultimately setting the stage for BI violations. This very real and frequent dilemma of having to ‘‘salute smartly and carry on’’ is made only more problematic if the guidance from on high does not, itself, stay consistent. The shifting winds of change and management fads too often create a situation where it is impossible for a manager to demonstrate consistency, keep promises, and walk the values they (or the broader organization) talk.

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

151

In conclusion to this section, we restate that positive and well-designed efforts to enhance individual and corporate integrity can be easily undermined by an organizational context that incentivizes low-integrity behavior, or by senior executives who fail to live up to the higher standard espoused. Because training and education in integrity tends by design to sensitize participants or students to integrity breach, it is extremely important that those in leadership positions themselves enact the high standards they hope to inculcate. Failure to do so risks generating extreme levels of cynicism.

7.5. Summary Raising integrity levels — your own or someone else’s — is a personal development challenge that entails learning new skills and habits, developing new awareness, and confronting personal demons and automatic behaviors. It is not an easy challenge, nor is the change process an easy ﬁx. It requires sustained effort and attention. Because of that requirement, a successful change effort must: Motivate change. The motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic, and may focus on approach or avoidance. Intrinsic motivations may be more durable, but extrinsic motivations are easier to manage. Avoidance motives, such as the fear of scandal, might help in the initial unfreezing process. However, they also inhibit higher cognitive functioning and learning, so approach motives should be emphasized. Fortunately, the BI framework facilitates approach motivation. Equip. Integrity is a personal discipline that calls for the development of skills and habits. Tactful honesty often requires greater skill than deceit. Likewise, many promises are broken because the actor was not thoughtful enough in making the promise or did not apply techniques of tracking and managing their commitments. Fuzzy communication often results in the perception of broken promises — which is, in practice, as bad as the real thing. Further, learners must develop awareness and sensitivities, both of any internal mechanisms that might serve to undermine their follow-through, and of how they are perceived by others. Follow-up. Changing behavior patterns that are as pervasive and as deeply rooted as those around commitments is difﬁcult and will almost certainly entail backslides and failures along the way. To create any lasting change, one must put in place a system that maintains accountability for the change effort, reminds learners what they are trying to do and why, provides troubleshooting and exercises targeted at the learner’s speciﬁc areas of difﬁculty, and provides emotional support for the struggle. The follow-up can come in the form of personal coaching, or peer accountability partners, or a facilitated or nonfacilitated accountability circles. One way or another, make sure learners have a serious, honest, and supportive conversation about the change effort at least every two weeks for three or four months after initial exposure. Provide a context. Do not allow the larger organizational context to undermine your efforts. Don’t demoralize learners with policies that create perverse incentives or leadership that demonstrates and fails to acknowledge blatant hypocrisy and

152

Tony Simons et al.

promise breaking. While organizational perfection may be an unattainable ideal, to create change it is important that senior executives demonstrate support for the very real challenge of raising integrity levels. The best way to demonstrate support is through action — namely by providing adequate resources for the change effort and by endeavoring to clean up their own house. If all four of these elements are in place, then your efforts to raise integrity levels are very likely to succeed and to yield positive outcomes both for the organization and the individuals in it.

Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the people with whom we had interesting conversations and interviews for this chapter. More speciﬁcally, we would like to acknowledge Laurent Ledoux, Head of Public Banking, at BNP Paribas Fortis in Belgium, and Mr. Len Crowley, Executive director, PLI Global in Colorado Springs, CO.

References Avolio, B. J., & Luthans, F. (2006). The high impact leader: Moments matter in accelerating authentic leadership development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Basik, K. (2010). Expanding the boundaries of behavioral integrity in organizations. Dissertation thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL. Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York, NY: Free Press. Blass, F. R., & Ferris, G. R. (2007). Leader reputation: The role of mentoring, political skill, contextual learning, and adaptation. Human Resource Management, 46, 5–19. Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal Practice and Research, 60, 298–313. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The beneﬁts of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822–848. Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 211–237. Carmody, J., Baer, R. A., Lykins, E. L. B., & Olendzki, N. (2009). An empirical study of the mechanisms of mindfulness in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 613–626. Ceasar, D., Ferris, G. R., & Perrewe´, P. L. (2005). Leader political skill and authentic leadership. In: W. Gardner, B. Avolio & F. Walumbwa (Eds), Authentic leadership theory and practice: Origin, effects and development (Vol. 3, pp. 139–154). Oxford: Elsevier. Cha, S. E., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). When values backﬁre: Leadership, attribution, and disenchantment in a values-driven organization. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 57–78. Crowley, L. (2010). Executive director, PLI Global Personal Interview. Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the workplace. Journal of Management, 37(4), 997–1018.

Four Key Steps in Developing Leader Integrity

153

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The what and why of human goal pursuit: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519. Embley, K. (2005). The burning platform: Identiﬁcation of the ‘‘burning issue’’ will encourage change in stakeholder behavior. Policy Perspectives. Center for Public Policy & Administration. Retrieved from http://www.cppa.utah.edu/outreach/articles/PP_Burning_Platform.pdf. Epley, N., & Dunning, D. (2000). Feeling ‘‘holier than thou’’: Are self-serving assessments produced by errors in self- or social prediction? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 861–875. Epley, N., & Dunning, D. (2006). The mixed blessings of self-knowledge in behavioral prediction: Enhanced discrimination but exacerbated bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 641–655. Ferris, G. R., Munyon, T. P., Basik, K. J., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). The performance evaluation context: Social, emotional, cognitive, political, and relationship components. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 146–163. Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31, 126–152. Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Perrewe´, P. L., Brouer, R. L., Douglas, C., & Lux, S. (2007). Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33, 290–320. Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., Gilin, D., & White, J. B. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent in strategic interactions. Psychological Science, 19(4), 378–384. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300. Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 769–783. Koole, S. L., Govorun, O., Cheng, C. M., & Gallucci, M. (2009). Pulling yourself together: Meditation promotes congruence between implicit and explicit self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1220–1226. Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2003). The leadership challenge. The most trusted source on becoming a leader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difﬁculties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inﬂated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. Leroy, H., Halbesleben, J., Savage, G., & Simons, T. (2010). Behavioral integrity, priority of safety, psychological safety, and safety outcomes: A team-level study. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Montreal, CA. Leroy, H., Palanski, M., & Simons, T. (2009). How being true to the self helps leaders walk the talk: Authentic leadership and leader behavioral integrity driving follower affective organizational commitment and work role performance. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Chicago, IL.

154

Tony Simons et al.

Milton, L., Simons, T., & Leroy, H. (2011). Three implications of identity theory for behavioral integrity research, August. Paper to be presented at Academy of Management Meeting, San Antonio, TX. Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2007). Integrity and leadership: Clearing the conceptual confusion. European Management Journal, 25, 171–184. Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2011). Impact of leader behavioral integrity on follower job performance: A three-study examination. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 405–420. Roberts, L. M., Dutton, J. E., Spreitzer, G. M., Heapy, E. D., & Quinn, R. E. (2005). Composing the reﬂected best-self portrait: Building pathways for becoming extraordinary in work. Academy of Management Review, 30, 712–736. Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 1–14. Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13, 18–35. Simons, T. (2008). The integrity dividend: Leading by the power of your word. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Simons, T., Tomlinson, E., & Leroy, H. (2011). Research on behavioral integrity: A promising construct for positive organizational scholarship. In: K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds), Handbook of positive organizational scholarship. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tsui, A. S., & Ashford, S. J. (1994). Adaptive self-regulation: A process view of managerial effectiveness. Journal of Management, 20, 93–121.

Chapter 8

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool to Promote Integrity Awareness: A Chinese Perspective Heh Jason Huang

Abstract Purpose –– Combining principles and pragmatism is one of the most difﬁcult challenges any leader would face. We want leaders to be morally sensitive pragmatists. This chapter shows how groups of MBA and EMBA students in Taiwan interactively learned the integrity issues of their decisions. Approach –– By using proper scenarios and performing careful analysis of consistency among thought, voice, and action (a TVA model), management educators can better align teaching with the need to foster integrity awareness of the students. Findings –– In the expatriation scenario with four alternative actions, only 30% of the students in both MBA and EMBA classes opted for the action with behavioral integrity implication. Practical implications –– The behavioral deﬁnition of integrity is too narrow that people would ﬁnd widespread phenomena of lacking integrity in our business managers. To Confucius and his disciples, there are other more important elements than behavioral integrity within a larger overarching framework of values. Social implications –– The answer to what is a good moral code for a leader would be the most problematic when referring to integrity because integrity in organizational life is a multifaceted concept that operates at many levels and can be viewed from many perspectives. Originality of paper –– This chapter proposes a TVA model as a teaching tool to promote integrity awareness. The model not only facilitates discussion but also makes a contribution to clarify the concept of integrity by dealing with the different aspects of the concept.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

156

Heh Jason Huang

Traditionally, the concept of integrity is closely bounded to morality and is treated as personal virtue. Empirical studies found that integrity is an inﬂuential antecedent of leader trustworthiness (Deery, Iverson, & Walsh, 2006; Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2009). Leaders shape and reinforce an ethical or unethical organizational climate by what they pay attention to, how they react to crises, and how they behave (Sims & Brinkmann, 2002). Being honest and trustworthy with integrity, leaders can provide the ethical tone for the organizations (Trevino, Brown, & Hartman, 2003). Nevertheless, while integrity is seen as very important, there is little agreement on how it actually works. Existing research has shown a more popular deﬁnition of integrity in terms of consistency of a person’s words and deeds, that is, behavioral integrity (Palanski & Yammarino, 2007; Simons, 2002). However, a strict rigidness of integrity application is not only impractical but also undesirable (Barry & Stephens, 1998; Becker, 1998). Integrity is under challenge when ethical or moral dilemmas arise. Leaders hold their integrity to gain trustworthiness; yet at the same time they may have to compromise their integrity in terms of voice or behavior for survival. Therefore, it will be necessary for leaders to manage a delicate balance between ﬂexibility and total rigidness of integrity. Integrity is a multifacet concept that can be looked at from various angles and perspectives. The above-mentioned behavioral deﬁnition of integrity, with an emphasis on trustworthiness, is too narrow. With such a narrow deﬁnition, people would ﬁnd widespread phenomena of the lack of integrity in our business managers, especially those in some cultures with high pragmatism. Particularly, Chinese are pragmatic. They see functionality and results as the primary motivators. Besides trustworthiness, to Confucius and his disciples, there are other more important elements within a larger overarching framework of values. Therefore, while emphasizing being trustworthy by keeping one’s words, Confucius described the people with a rigidity of behavioral integrity as being of a petty-minded manner (岏㉔≰,嫛㉔㨫,䫫䫫䏅⺞ⅉ❘) (The Analects of Confucius, Chapter 13). As pointed out by Srivastva and Cooperrider (1988), leader integrity deﬁes simple categorization and its meaning is highly context-speciﬁc; its important issues begin to surface only after being raised to the level of group discussion. Following this line of thought, I propose a scenario-based approach to show how the desirable virtue of integrity can be educated, developed, and further exercised by leaders.

8.1. Consistency of Thought, Voice, and Action Etymologically, integrity comes from the Latin: integritas, meaning ‘‘wholeness, soundness, completeness’’ as does the word integer meaning ‘‘whole.’’ In this context, integrity is the inner sense of ‘‘wholeness’’ deriving from qualities such as honesty. Integrity can be regarded as the opposite of hypocrisy in that former regards internal consistency as a virtue. As such, integrity is a concept of consistency in thoughts, attitude, words, and behavior across time (Trevino, Hartman, & Brown, 2000; Worden, 2003).

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

157

Nevertheless, behavioral integrity has been seen by many scholars as a parsimonious deﬁnition (Palanski & Yammarino, 2007; Simons, 2002). Behavioral integrity represents the consistency of words and action, which meets in part the popular deﬁnition of integrity as trustworthiness and promise keeping. Behavioral integrity is arguably amoral — an individual may declare an intention to act unethically and, in following through, claim to act with integrity. In existing literature, moral integrity is a concept of integrity with an emphasis on morality (Olson, 2002). Moral integrity is a very complex construct to deﬁne and may represent coherence between the philosophical components of moral discernment, consistent behavior, and public justiﬁcation. An appropriate Chinese translation for ‘‘moral integrity’’ would be zheng qi (㷲㺲), which is also not easy to explain in Chinese. However, it is readily recognized as a virtue that lays the foundation for all other virtues and is thus fundamental to all others. Carter (1996) referred to moral integrity when he deﬁned integrity in three steps: ‘‘discerning what is right and what is wrong; acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost; and saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong.’’ Therefore, concept of integrity is more about the wholesomeness of the character and the steadfastness in the adherence to one’s personal ethics. A person of integrity will bear the consequences, as Carter (1996) pointed out that ‘‘we admire most those who stand up for their beliefs when they have something to lose.’’ Integrity can be explained as the belief in their own moral ethics and the conviction to stick by them even during times of adversity and misfortune. And integrity can still be seen as a consistency between words and actions, but the words here should include the thoughts, that is, ‘‘words inside our heads’’ (Harris, 2008) and the voices, that is, ‘‘words being said.’’

8.2. Inconsistency of Thought, Voice, and Action As integrity has come to take on the positive aspect of being a ‘‘whole’’ person, it seems desirable for people to have the consistency among thought, voice, and action. Nevertheless, we have also noticed, more often than not, all kinds of inconsistencies among them in the real world. Below are various perspectives of explanations on those inconsistencies. A contractarian perspective on inconsistency would point to the basic idea that ethical obligations originate in mutual agreements or contracts between people. Integrative social contracts theory (ISCT) developed by Donaldson and Dunfee (1994, 1999) can be used as a framework that anchors integrity in ethical theory (Gosling & Huang, 2009). Instead of starting from an individual’s judgment processes, ISCT started by considering the interactions and interventions of the individual’s surroundings. The immediate surroundings of an individual are described as ‘‘microsocial’’ and the broader, outer parts as ‘‘macrosocial.’’ Therefore, within different levels of social surroundings, different codes of actions were developed. The central argument of the ISCT is that there is no absolute set of

158

Heh Jason Huang

guidelines that suits every situation in all circumstances. Conﬂicts and dilemmas exist in complex groups and social interactions. Individuals will try to satisfy as much as the micro-local rules allow, but anything in the local area that violates the macro is unacceptable. A theory-of-action perspective on inconsistency points to the action strategies adopted by managers. The action strategies are mainly produced by the theories-inuse, as termed by Argyris (1993). The governing values of theories-in-use are being in unilateral control, being rational, and suppressing negative feelings. According to Argyris, there are two types of master programs of theories of action: those that are espoused and those that are used. The power motive of the leaders would keep them from acting with integrity. The ‘‘folly of ignoring’’ would be another perspective on inconsistency. It is about the human nature that leads people to ignore the inconsistency of their thoughts, voices, and actions. They may make decisions unconsciously when reacting out of the ‘‘human nature’’ and do the usual, commonly accepted thing. Kerr (1975) raised our attention to the follies of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Some of the reasons he gave for the follies of a reward system may also contribute to the foolish mismatches among people’s thought, voice, and action. However, more pertinent and general factors for the explanation to the inconsistencies among integrity components may be from the national culture perspective. National culture is the dominant culture within the boundaries of the nation-state. As cultural norms, values, and beliefs are passed on through generations, historical factors play a central role in culture formation. Especially, Chinese culture has its deep roots in history, which span almost ﬁve millennia. The Chinese see themselves as guardians of a unique heritage. History serves as a reference point for many customs, traditions, and practices, including their views on the various aspects of integrity. The following section is a detailed discussion of the Chinese culture in terms of integrity-related values.

8.3. Chinese Integrity-Related Core Values When referring to moral integrity, we need to mention Wen Tianxiang (1236–1283), a prime minister in the last years of the Southern Song Dynasty of China. He has become a popular symbol of patriotism in China for his resistance to Kublai Khan’s invasion of the Song, and for his refusal to yield despite being captured and tortured. Wen suffered for four years in a military prison before his execution in 1283. During that time he wrote the famous classics ‘‘Song of Moral Integrity’’ (㷲㺲㷛) that most of Chinese are familiar with. The story of Wen Tianxiang is a good case to show the characteristics of moral integrity in Chinese societies. Whereas the West focuses on the individual, China places more emphasis on a collective perspective (Hofstede, 1980). A key part of collectivism is taking pride in and being loyal to the country. Therefore, Chinese

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

159

usually refer ‘‘moral integrity’’ (or ‘‘righteousness’’) to sacriﬁcing oneself or doing something good to beneﬁt the country and society. Filial piety has the second place, next to country, in integrity. Filial piety in Chinese culture is an individual’s natural feeling toward his parents. It is composed of caring love, sincere concern, and natural respect. In Chinese culture, the ultimate moral authority is still the human world. The practice of moral life is not following the spiritual authority or God, but to follow humanistic sensitivity and reﬂection. Filial piety just refers to the most immediate and necessary human relation. Confucius clearly claimed that ﬁlial piety is the foundation of morality (The Analects of Confucius, Chapter 1). That is why he deﬁes the type of integrity in terms of honesty in a case of testifying against one’s own father for stealing a goat. He maintains that real integrity exists when a father conceals the misconduct of his son, and a son conceals the misconduct of his father (䓅䍉⷟楀,⷟䍉䓅楀,䦃⦷␅₼䩲) (Chapter 13). Therefore, it is not surprising to notice that, in a Chinese culture, integrity with a subject-matter other than patriotism and ﬁlial piety is somewhat downplayed. When Tzu-Gung asked Confucius, ‘‘What qualities entitle a person to be considered scholarly?’’ Confucius gave his answers in the following order: ‘‘being loyal to the commission of the lord,’’ ‘‘being praised for ﬁlial piety,’’ and ‘‘being trustworthy in walking the talk.’’ Confucius not only put behavioral integrity in the third place but also warned Tzu-Gung not to do it with a petty-minded manner. Mencius, the most famous Confucian after Confucius, gave an even more outspoken comment on behavioral consistency (Li Lau, Chapter 11). He emphasized that great men are those who stick to principle of righteousness, neither must they to be sincere about what had been said, nor must bring about accomplishment for what had been undertaken (⮶ⅉ劔,岏ₜ㉔≰,嫛ₜ㉔㨫,㍮券㓏⦷). It seems clear that although Confucians think highly about being honest and being consistent between words and deeds, they maintain that people should not be conﬁned by those norms if it is a right thing to break them. This line of thought may be understood by the Confucians’ Doctrine of the Mean (Analects, Chapter 6). The Doctrine conformed to the tradition of the philosophical Taoists who believed in the mutuality of nature (Yin and Yang). This philosophy maintains that a leader must understand the movement and constant dynamics of these two opposing but complementary forces to maintain harmony in life.

8.4. Scenario Analysis for Promoting Integrity Awareness When fostering the development of managers with integrity in a Confucian culture like that of China, management educators must take into account important contextual factors. It is important for students in management education to not only understand that integrity may be susceptible to inﬂuences of situation and disposition, but they also need to understand what these potential inﬂuences are. To bring together contextual factors and individual interactions within their surrounding environments, scenarios can be used for analysis. Scenarios represent stimuli

160

Heh Jason Huang

in different contexts, and scenario analysis is a process of analyzing possible future events by considering alternative possible outcomes. Each scenario carries different emphases on contextual domains. While a slightly different emphasis on each scenario is placed, scenarios could play as modiﬁers and ﬁlters. They could screen, change, and provide necessary surroundings, situations, and environments in which managers and our survey subjects could be circumscribed and imbedded (Huang & Hung, 2009). In facilitating scenario discussions, I propose a model of thought, voice, and action (hereafter called TVA analytical model for integrity or TVA model): the thought (ideas and opinions about a given subject; the words inside one’s head), the voice (an expression of one’s will and desire; the words being expressed), and the action (the choice being made). Within the model, the consistencies among thought, voice, and action can be calculated. The data thereby generated can be used for group discussion. Accordingly, students will be able to understand the causes and the justiﬁcations that may initiate a divergence from the ideal states of integrity.

8.5. TVA Analytical Model for Integrity: An Illustration The instructor may run a series of scenario analysis classes to respond to one important integrity issue. The students use the information from the scenario to independently complete the worksheet (see Appendix 8.A). Please refer to the example as follow: You are the vice president for Sales and Marketing of a leading motorcycle company and have appointed Mr. Chang to develop the Indonesian market. Mr. Chang accepted this position on the premise that the assignment will be for a limited period of three years and he can return to the company headquarters after the period. Three years had passed and Mr. Chang had done his best to bring that Indonesian subsidiary to a break-even situation. He now expresses his desire to ﬂy back home to have more time with his aging parents. However, ﬁnding a successor would not be easy and is becoming a matter of great concern. What would you do given the following options? A. Acknowledge Mr. Chang for his outstanding performance and persuade him to extend his stay. And tell him that he can come home after the subsidiary reports stable revenue. B. Just allow Mr. Chang to return home as agreed. C. Promote Mr. Chang and offer him a better package to entice him to stay longer and work harder in his post. D. Talk to Mr. Chang’s parents and ask them to convince their son to stay with his current post.

Forty-four MBA students and 59 EMBA students were exposed to the above scenario. Based on his or her own choice of action, each student was asked to evaluate the consistency between thought and voice, and the consistency between

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

161

voice and action chosen. In addition, he or she was required to evaluate the legitimacy of the voice (then) and the action (now), respectively. The three indicators of legitimacy are: (1) In line with the existing practice? (2) Be willing to discuss the decision publicly? (3) Having support from the closest friends and family members? A decision is probably acceptable on ethical grounds if the decision maker can answer positively to each of those questions (Jones, 2010;Trevino, 1986). Anonymously, all the above were done on a worksheet (see Appendix 8.A) and the students’ subjective evaluations were made on 10-point Likert scales. All the worksheets were collected and divided according to the alternative actions. For this scenario, there are four groups and for each group, mean values of the subjective voice-action consistency (i.e., behavioral integrity or BI) and the subjective thoughtvoice consistency (i.e., voice integrity or VI) were calculated. Also, the mean values of the legitimacy indicators for voice and action can be obtained. Appendices 8.B and 8.C are the results for the MBA class and the EMBA class, respectively. With the results provided, the students were then randomly and equally divided into four groups for discussions. Each group discussed one of the four alternatives, which was also assigned randomly. A focal question for discussion is to identify the initial thought of the vice president when he made his earlier statement. For the alternatives rated with lower levels of integrity (BI or VI), it is important to investigate the contextual factors behind. After discussion, each group was required to make a report to the class and take questions.

8.6. Discussion In the above scenario, the vice president was faced with a conﬂict between idealism and pragmatism. Each student was required to assume the role of the vice president and choose among the four alternative courses of action. A worksheet (see Appendix 8.A) was then used to guide each student in evaluating his or her own choice. After completing the worksheets and aggregating the evaluations, three kinds of data can be generated: the preference for actions, the level of integrity, and the level of legitimacy (see Appendices 8.B and 8.C). As for the action preference, the action with behavioral integrity (the action B) was chosen by about 30% of the students in both MBA and EMBA classes. The three other alternatives valued pragmatism above idealism in different degrees. The above scenario aroused student interest immediately at the onset of the study because most of the students had concrete experience or reﬂective observation for expatriation issues. It is important to note that the scenario should include all the major alternatives or options in which the contextual factors faced by the students had been taken into account. For example, action D in the above scenario seems very unlikely in a Western culture, but it is deﬁnitely an option in Chinese societies which place far greater emphasis on ﬁlial piety. Being provided with the data from students’ worksheets, each of the four groups discussed one speciﬁc action randomly assigned by the instructor. Based on that action taken, the students take turn to discuss on what was really in the mind

162

Heh Jason Huang

(i.e., the thought) of those decision makers in the ﬁrst place. In a more objective manner, each group should come up with the evaluations on the levels of integrity (including VI and BI) and the levels of legitimacy (voice and action, respectively) for the action assigned. On one hand, by comparing the group evaluation with the students’ subjective evaluation on integrity, the students would be able to be aware of the possible integrity issues. On the other hand, by comparing the group evaluation with the students’ subjective evaluation on legitimacy, the students may detect what the decision makers truly believe and may want to investigate where those beliefs come from and if they are morally grounded; hence, the instructor can introduce later a meaningful discussion on moral integrity. This chapter does not go into the detailed ﬁndings of the above scenario since it was only used for illustration purpose. More importantly, this exercise did yield insightful comments from the students. It was really a learning process because some students expressed their willingness to change their decisions if they had to make the choice again. Although TVA model is mainly a teaching tool to promote students’ integrity awareness, researchers may ﬁnd it useful for comparative studies (e.g., comparisons between the MBA and the EMBA or participants with different demographics or cultural backgrounds).

8.7. Conclusion Due to the elusiveness of the concept of integrity, Carter (1996) put it this way: ‘‘Integrity is like the weather: everybody talks about it but nobody knows what to do about it’’ (p. 181). Moreover, the concepts of integrity, morality, ethics, and legality are often entwined to create confusion (Erhard, Jensen, & Zaffron, 2010). As a result, the development of integrity awareness is a neglected area of management education. The TVA model of integrity proposed in this chapter intends to make a contribution to clarify the concept of integrity by dealing with the different aspects of the concept. By doing so, managers would be able to recognize it, accept it, and manage it. Any moral decision a leader makes should be able to withstand adversity and challenges. A leader needs to be consistent in the face of adversity, whereas a leader also needs to be adaptive to be contingent to the environment. If the concept of integrity is only understood as the consistency between thought and voice (i.e., voice integrity or VI) or between voice and action (i.e., behavioral integrity or BI), then we, as the management educators, should feel frustrated by the fact that many students evaluated the actions of their own choice with very low in BI with a clear conscience and peace of mind. Moreover, many of the students admitted that they did not express their thoughts fully and, therefore, were low in voice integrity. Fortunately, ethical consideration does not demand perfect honesty and consistency. From a Chinese perspective at least, it is sometimes even a ‘‘right’’ thing for us if we are not subject to the rigid requirements of integrity. If carried to its logical conclusion, this argument points to the most important thing that we know whether it is a ‘‘right’’ thing to do. For this purpose, TVA model of integrity can help facilitate

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

163

useful discussion. And through the scenario analysis, hopefully we can still ﬁnd some principles that we should never compromise, no matter how pragmatic we are.

Acknowledgment I wish to thank Gerhard Reber, Peithe Salva, Jay Vora, and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of the chapter. Financial support from the National Science Council, Taiwan for my research projects on integrity is gratefully acknowledged (grant numbers: NSC-93-2416-H-110-032, 94-2416-H-110019, & 95-2416-H-110-019).

References Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Barry, B., & Stephens, C. U. (1998). Objections to an objectivist approach to integrity. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 162–169. Becker, T. E. (1998). Integrity in organizations: Beyond honesty and conscientiousness. Academy of Management Review, 23, 154–161. Carter, S. L. (1996). Integrity. New York, NY: Basic Books. Confucius. (1989). The analects of Confucius (A. Waley, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage Books. Deery, S., Iverson, R., & Walsh, J. (2006). Towards a better understanding of psychological breach: A study of customer service employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 166–175. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Towards a uniﬁed conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252–284. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. (1999). Ties that bind: A social approach to business ethic. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Erhard, W. H., Jensen, M. C., & Zaffron, S. (2010). Integrity: A positive model that incorporates the normative phenomena of morality, ethics, and legality. Working Paper NOM No. 10-061. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Gosling, M., & Huang, H. J. (2009). The ﬁt between integrity and integrative social contracts theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 407–417. Harris, R. (2008). The happiness trap: How to stop struggling and start living. Boston, MA: Trumpeter Books. Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2009). Use shaping and chaining to boost employees’ work. Harvard Business Review, March, p. 26. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Huang, H. J., & Hung, Y. (2009, August). Gender differences in behavioral integrity from a social-contracts perspective. Paper presented at Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. Jones, G. R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

164

Heh Jason Huang

Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 769–783. Olson L. M. (2002). The relationship between moral integrity, psychological well-being, and anxiety. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2007). Integrity and leadership: Clearing the conceptual confusion. European Management Journal, 25(3), 171–184. Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13(1), 18–35. Sims, R. R., & Brinkmann, J. (2002). Leaders as moral role models: The case of John Gutfreund at Salomon Brothers. Journal of Business Ethics, 35, 327–339. Srivastva, S., & Cooperrider, D. L. (1988). Executive integrity: The search for high human values in organizational life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11, 601–617. Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56, 5–37. Trevino, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142. Worden, S. (2003). The role of integrity as a mediator in strategic leadership: A recipe for reputational capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 31–44.

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

165

Appendix 8.A. Worksheet for ‘‘Indonesia Expatriation’’: A Scenario Mr. Chang accepted the position on the premise that the assignment will be for a limited period of three years and he can return to the company headquarters after the period. Three years had passed and Mr. Chang had done his best to bring that Indonesian subsidiary to a break-even situation. He now expresses his desire to ﬂy back home to have more time with his aging parents. However, ﬁnding a successor would not be easy and is becoming a matter of great concern. What would you do given the following options?

WHAT WAS SAID THEN Promise Mr.Chang Repatriation at 3-year term

THE ACTION NOW

The consistency between said and done Low

High

(Please pick one)

0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10

Considering what you have said: In line with the existing practice? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High Willing to discuss what you said publicly? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High Being supported by your closest friends? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High

A. Persuade Mr. Chang to extend his stay until it reports stable revenue. B. Allow Mr. Chang to return home as agreed. C. Offer a higher ranking and a better package to entice Chang to stay longer at his current post. D. Convince Chang’ parents of asking their son to stay with his current post.

The consistency between what you said and what in your mind. Low

High

0.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10

Considering the action you took: In line with the existing practice? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High Willing to discuss your action publicly? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High Being supported by your closest friends? Low 0_1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10 High

WHAT REALLY IN YOUR MIND WERE:

166

Heh Jason Huang

Appendix 8.B. MBA Class Feedback Information as the Basis for Group Discussions

Actions

Action A

Action B

Action C

Action D

n: 26 (59%)

n: 14 (31%)

n: 2 (5%)

n: 2 (5%)

Offer a higher rank and a better package to entice Chang to stay longer

Convince Chang’ parents of asking their son to stay with his current post

Intention of the actions

Persuade Mr. Chang to extend his stay until it reports stable revenue

Voice: Promise Mr. Chang repatriation at 3-year term

Subjective BI (Behavioral Integrity, i.e., Voice–Action consistency)

Thought: What are the true thoughts in the ﬁrst place

Subjective VI (Voice Integrity, i.e., Thought–Voice consistency)

(5.3)

Allow Mr. Chang to return home as agreed

(7.8)

(1.5)

(8.0)

(6.0)

(7.1)

(5.0)

(5.0)

V1

7.5

8.0

10.0

6.0

A1

6.6

8.7

7.5

6.0

V2

6.9

7.9

4.5

5.5

A2

6.2

8.6

8.5

3.0

V3

7.2

7.8

6.5

6.5

A3

6.0

8.5

6.0

5.5

Voice legitimacy ¼ (V1 + V2 + V3)/3

7.2

7.9

7.0

6.0

Action legitimacy ¼ (A1 + A2 + A3)/3

6.3

8.6

7.3

4.8

In line with the existing practice? Be willing to discuss the decision publicly? Supported by closest friends and family?

Scenario-based Approach as a Teaching Tool for Integrity Awareness

167

Appendix 8.C. EMBA Class Feedback Information as the Basis for Group Discussions

Actions

Action A n: 21 (36%)

Action B n: 18 (30%) Allow Mr. Chang to return home as agreed

Action C

Action D

n: 16 (27%)

n: 4 (7%)

Offer a higher rank and a better package to entice Chang to stay longer

Convince Chang’ parents of asking their son to stay with his current post

Intention of the actions

Persuade Mr. Chang to extend his stay until it reports stable revenue

Voice: Promise Mr. Chang repatriation at 3-year term

Subjective BI (Behavioral Integrity, i.e., Voice–Action consistency)

Thought: The true thoughts in the ﬁrst place

Subjective VI (Voice Integrity, i.e., Thought–Voice consistency)

In line with the existing practice?

(7.2)

(9.3)

(5.6)

(6.5)

(8.4)

(8.3)

(6.4)

(8.7)

V1

8.5

8.7

6.9

8.5

A1

7.8

8.7

6.4

8.0

V2

8.9

8.3

6.5

9.3

A2

8.4

9.1

6.6

7.0

V3

8.7

7.8

7.1

7.8

A3

7.6

8.1

7.3

7.0

Voice legitimacy ¼ (V1 + V2 + V3)/3

8.7

8.3

6.8

8.5

Action legitimacy ¼ (A1 + A2 + A3)/3

7.9

8.6

6.8

7.3

Be willing to discuss the decision publicly? Supported by closest friends and family?

PART IV DEVELOPING CURRICULA BASED ON A LIBERAL APPROACH TO EDUCATION: A WAY TOWARD RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS

Chapter 9

Returning to a Holistic Management Education and the Tradition of Liberal Education Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Abstract Purpose – This chapter advances the growing call from scholars who contend that business education needs to incorporate a whole-systems philosophy guided by the traditional liberal education model. We focus on traditional undergraduate students in our discussion because their stages in cognitive, ethical, and psychological development suggest they have different developmental needs compared to conventional MBA students. Methodology/approach – Insights from both a literature review and qualitative data gathered from a three-year action research process that engaged four business education stakeholder groups (teacher-scholars, administrators, students, and business practitioners) in virtual and face-to-face dialogues inform our emergent model for a liberal undergraduate business education. Findings – We detail the competencies involved in, pedagogical approaches needed for, and philosophical tensions that emerge when working toward the creation of a liberal education model for undergraduate business education. Research limitations/implications – The action-research project informing the current chapter was conducted with a limited sample size only in the United States. Future research could seek to expand on our ﬁndings with a larger, more internationally diverse sample. Social implications – A liberal-based education helps students connect the siloed realms of information they are exposed to in school and helps them begin to view themselves as citizens of a larger society, encouraging them act with integrity toward others in business and beyond. Originality/value of paper – The chapter offers a model to begin re-conceptualizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical tradition of liberal education.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

172

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin When you have broken the reality into concepts you never can reconstruct it in its wholeness. –William James

Old habits are hard to break. This statement rings true not only for individuals but also for industries. A glance through the history of modern business reveals the deep-seated pattern of breaking down whole systems into measurable, isolated, component parts to help increase efﬁciency and effectiveness. With industrialization, Frederick Taylor’s extreme focus on optimizing task-oriented work and establishing time-motion rewards accelerated the perception of organizations as being comprised of various parts; like a machine, work began to be reduced to smaller and smaller elements to be efﬁcient. This mechanistic metaphor has become so pervasive in business we no longer even recognize it as an optional way to approach creating effectiveness, but rather we treat it as a given (Bolman & Deal, 2008; Morgan, 1996). Yet, as the recent ethical and ﬁnancial crises around the world remind us, organizations are not machines; they are intricate and integrated elements in the fabric of our society. From single companies like Enron to entire industries like mortgage lending, we have learned that a myopic focus on one area of business — such as short-term ﬁnancial proﬁts — can lead to blindness regarding business’ longterm, holistic societal impact. Similarly, when individuals only focus on meeting their individual performance metrics without consideration for how they ﬁt into a broader business and social reality, we increasingly see the unethical and unsustainable behaviors that have addled corporate culture. We are coming to realize that the success of business has become fundamentally interconnected with the successes of our society, and vice versa. Therefore, management education has an intensiﬁed responsibility for cultivating holistic thinkers who can agilely navigate the complexity of our business world and balance both business and society’s needs, a process we will argue best happens through the tradition called ‘‘liberal education.’’1 In this chapter, we advocate for the long-standing tradition of liberal education, which historically integrates lessons and thinking across many disciplines that are segmented in today’s curricula. After ﬁrst detailing the rationale for changing toward a more integrated model of business education, we deﬁne what a liberal education entails. We trace the history of undergraduate education, highlighting the increasing call for a return to more integrated education. Speciﬁcally, we offer a model for conceptualizing undergraduate management education grounded in the historical tradition of liberal education. While we believe that such a model is also applicable at the MBA level, we focus speciﬁcally in this chapter on the traditional undergraduate student population (i.e., students under 23 years old) who comprise 69.7% of all undergraduate students nationwide (NCES, 2006). We purposely concentrate on this group because their stages in cognitive, ethical, and psychological development suggest they have different developmental needs compared to conventional MBA students. We

1. Our use of the term ‘‘liberal’’ in this context does not relate to any political ideology.

Return to Liberal Education

173

ground our proposed educational model in data gathered during a three-year, multistakeholder action research agenda seeking to identify best practices, imagine new possibilities, and experiment with training new leaders for the future. We conclude with a discussion of the challenges and tensions inherent in any paradigmatic shift, especially one as long standing as business and management education.

9.1. The Call to Transform Management Education Today’s complex global world has fundamentally challenged the traditional, siloed business thinking that has predominated business practices during the twentieth century. The current call to create institutions that foster continuous innovation requires vibrant and imaginative thinking (Segal, 2010). The increasingly cross-cultural and multi-generational work force requires insightful and inclusive leadership strategies, adaptive thinking, and critical reﬂection skills (Thomas, Thomas, Ely, & Meyerson, 2002; Zemke, Raines & Filipczak 2000). The rapid evolution of social technology tools is revolutionizing the possibilities for corporate interaction more than ever before (Solis, 2011). Furthermore, decreasing natural resources, radical transparency in the marketplace, and increasing expectations for sound social and environmental performance from stakeholders are but a few of the many obstacles to integrative, systems-thinking facing current business leaders (Laszlo & Zhexembayeva, 2011). Systemic thinking approaches are necessary today if value chains are to be maintained in a sustainable manner for both business and wider society (Atwater, Kannan, & Stephens, 2008; Thurston, 2000). However, a recent Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) study indicated that while 76% of business school deans believe an integrated curriculum is necessary (Athavale, Davis, & Myring, 2008), fewer than 5% have a comprehensive program (DeMoranville, Aurand, & Gordan, 2000). Just as managing and leading in this environment requires new approaches, so too do our approaches for educating and developing the young minds who will be the future leaders in this world. After all, at its very core, the primary role of management education is to prepare students to become effective leaders of tomorrow, providing them with the tools, skills, and mindsets to face the daunting challenges, ethical dilemmas, and enormous opportunities they will inevitably experience during their careers. The call for management education, therefore, is to develop the effective curricular models and pedagogical strategies that will cultivate future managers who can lead with integrity and manage the ‘‘whole’’ in a competitive landscape that does not always cultivate such behaviors. From the Latin integritatem, integrity means ‘‘wholeness’’ and requires a willingness to see and experience the world as a collective whole rather than as an optimized set of competitive parts. Unfortunately, the majority of management education today reﬂects — and perpetuates — a siloed view of knowledge, with a bias toward functional and technical skill sets (Khurana, 2007). Such an approach has inadvertently truncated management education’s attention on developing the

174

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

human and caring dimensions critical for ethical behavior (i.e., Bennis & O’Toole, 2005; Donaldson, 2002; Ghoshal, 2005; Mintzberg 2004; Navarro, 2008). Yet, if we want students to act with integrity, we must model it at every level of the educational system. To this end, this chapter advances the growing call from scholars who contend that management education needs to incorporate a whole-systems philosophy if we are to facilitate students’ ability to act with integrity in an increasingly fragmented world (i.e., Atwater et al., 2008; Giacalone, 2004; Khurana, 2007; Mintzberg, 2004).

9.2. Liberal Education: Rediscovering and Returning to Our Roots We deﬁne a ‘‘liberal’’ approach to education as one that provides students with integrated coursework that spans across the major disciplines of the university (i.e., ‘‘hard’’ sciences, social sciences, humanities, and ﬁne arts) in a coherent program that actively helps students blend and apply the knowledge across their courses as well as focuses on the holistic development of the student as a person (i.e., ethically, intellectually, spiritually, socially and professionally). Key to this deﬁnition is its emphasis on coherence across disciplines and among students’ ways of being in the world. Coherence applies not only to general education requirements but also to business courses. Our deﬁnition is built on Schneider (2000) who explained that liberal learning includes, ‘‘forms of education that develop analytical and ethical judgment, expand cultural and imaginative horizons, prepare students for socially useful work, and foster both social responsibility and civic engagement in a wider world’’ (p. 2). Schneider further posits ﬁve broad areas of liberal learning: 1. essential skills, such as writing or quantitative reasoning or a second language; 2. cultural, societal, and scientiﬁc knowledge important in making sense of the world we inherit; 3. developed inquiry capacities and knowledge sufﬁcient to probe unscripted problems and complex issues; 4. integrative learning, or the ability to bring disparate kinds of knowledge and understanding to bear on complex problems; and, 5. grounded values, including the willingness to see the world through others’ eyes and a commitment to the value of learning itself. (ibid, p. 2) On the basis of this deﬁnition, one can see that a liberal education seeks to integrate paradigms, cultivate individual and systemic capacity, and foster critical thinking (Senchack, 2007). This type of education aims at giving students a broad grounding in various disciplines that better prepares them for the myriad of organizational roles they will face in their professional, civic, and social lives (AAC&U, 2007). In practice however, today’s colleges — even with their increased focus on cross-disciplinary general education requirements — often fall into the old rut of knowledge segmentation, where each course is treated as a unique entity, rather than as a complement to other courses in the curriculum.

Return to Liberal Education

175

We know that education can be so much more than graduation requirement checklists. At its roots, a liberal education is the coherent integration of multiple areas of knowledge and practice. This does not negate students’ desire for professional readiness, but the educational experience is intended to be co-created between the student’s initiative, faculty efforts, and an institution’s intention behind curricular and extra-curricular designs. Thus, beyond simply seeing education as a sequence of courses in a degree plan or a job training exercise, liberal education is a process by which individuals come to understand themselves holistically (i.e., minds, bodies, and beings) with multiple forms of knowledge, skills, and abilities (e.g., disciplinary literacy, leadership capacity, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning abilities); and students begin to understand themselves and organizations as integrated and contributing members of larger systems and societies (Neville, Godwin, Senchack, & Parks, 2007). From the liberal education perspective, students begin to make meaning from theory, critical thinking, and their lived experiences. Therefore, a liberal education model transcends particular courses and aims to transform students into responsible global citizens. A liberal approach to education is not novel. At one time, this education standard epitomized societies like ancient Greece. When President Lincoln signed the Morrill Act in 1862 establishing the U.S. system of public colleges, the Act explicitly asserted that the purpose of these land-grant colleges was to ‘‘promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life’’ (AAC&U, 2011). Similarly, the primary objective of the early baccalaureate degree was building foundational literacy in arts, natural science, and humanities and striving towards skills in moral reasoning and critical thinking abilities (Senchack, 2007), so that students could ‘‘broaden (themselves) and prepare for life in general’’ (Kimball, 1996, p. 18). American colleges today, however, have philosophically and programmatically drifted farther and farther away from integrated education models toward a post–World War II consumer oriented, job-training model (Obermueler, 1993). This shift reﬂects the broader shift in our society’s focus toward specialization, rapid success, and efﬁcient processes (Khurana, 2007). Silos of knowledge began to emerge with the professionalization of business and management, compartmentalizing subject matter into categories (Raelin, 2008). While silos offer depth of specialized learning (Campbell, Heriot, & Finney, 2006), we have shifted our educational attention away from the foundational cognitive and moral, psychosocial, and skills development processes that our younger students speciﬁcally need. Perhaps it is time for the pendulum to swing back. Calls for a shift back to a more integrated educational model are echoing throughout the Academy and beyond (Athavale et al., 2008; Bendheim, Waddock & Graves, 1998; Nesteruk, 2005). The Board of Directors for the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) issued a statement in 2002 saying, ‘‘Education serves democracy best when it prepares us for just the kinds of questions we face now: questions about a wider world, about our own values, and about difﬁcult choices we must make both as human beings and citizensy. The approach to higher learning that best serves individuals, our globally engaged democracy and an innovating economy is liberal education’’ (AAC&U, 2011). Building on this

176

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

assertion, the AAC&U has outlined how the contemporary approach to liberal education has shifted from a twentieth-century perception of being seen as nonvocational and only an option for a privileged few, to becoming an essential approach for all undergraduate education in the twenty-ﬁrst century. Academics such as Giacalone have similarly argued that to succeed in today’s increasingly complex market and society, every student ‘‘needs a balanced education that offers simple, basic humanistic knowledge to offset tactical reductionism’’ (2004, p. 418). Similarly, Jones (2005) states that, ‘‘higher education, business, and public policy makers will need to turn their attention to efforts of aligning higher education curricula and outcomes with the escalating demands of the surrounding environment y the value and beneﬁts of a liberal education will be more respected and in greater demand as the world becomes increasingly complex’’ (p. 32). Even the AACSB has supported the movement of programs toward a more integrated approach. They now encourage undergraduate business programs to include broad skills in their curriculum such as communication abilities, ethical understanding and reasoning abilities, analytic skills, use of information technology, understanding of the dynamics of the global economy, multicultural and diversity understanding, and reﬂective thinking skills (AACSB, 2009, p. 71). Clearly, some management educators recognize the value of holistic designs, even if as an industry we do not integrate well. AACSB’s evolving standards represent steps being taken within the ﬁeld toward creating a more integrated, holistic undergraduate education experience for our students, but we still have a long way to go. For example, 90% of programs rely on a single capstone course to provide integrated business functions (DeMoranville et al., 2000). Furthermore, while some business faculty argue that integrating is the job of the broader university curriculum or general education requirements, these presumptions again illustrate fragmented thinking. Similarly, Chew and McInnisBowers (2004) discuss an overarching problem with our attempts to integrate curricula, the reality that most attempts merely structure ‘‘bridges’’ between courses rather than genuinely ‘‘blending’’ approaches and perspectives. They claim that such an approach only serves to reinforce the idea that general education courses such as English, history or psychology (which help develop students’ cognitive, psychosocial, and skill levels) are separate, unrelated realms of knowledge that are merely ‘‘ﬁllers’’ that lack relevance to students’ true work within the business major (ibid.). At a tactical level, some undergraduate business programs designate which courses fulﬁll both the general education requirements and their business major requirements to encourage ‘‘double counting’’ courses rather than to encourage diversiﬁcation of interests. While students no doubt seek out courses that will fulﬁll multiple requirements simultaneously, it seems that we as faculty also compound the problem with a ‘‘jump-through-the-hoops’’ mentality of advising. As Wick and Phillips discuss, advisors often focus solely on major requirements at the marginalization of the general education core, resulting in students who ‘‘view general education as the ‘stuff to get out of the way’ via the path of least resistance’’ (2008, p. 24). These realities reduce the very intention behind diverse curriculum exposure in general education requirements.

Return to Liberal Education

177

Considering these various dynamics, it is arguably time to return to a holistic approach to management education. This is especially important at an undergraduate level, a population to which we now turn.

9.3. Traditional Undergraduates as a Unique Population The average undergraduate business student is younger, less professionally experienced and in a different developmental stage than the traditional MBA student (Ruegger & King, 1992). This holds signiﬁcant implications for developing integrity in various ways. First, age has implications on one’s generational perspective and life experiences, work experience holds implications for one’s ability to effectively grasp business theory, and a person’s developmental stage has implications for their cognitive, moral, and psychosocial abilities (Godwin & Neville, 2007). We brieﬂy address each of these dimensions in turn and how each correlates with implications of a liberal educational model.

9.3.1.

Age

While the average age of entering MBA class at the top business schools is 28 years old, with most ﬁrst-year MBA students having worked an average of four to ﬁve years before attending business school (Schweitzer, 2005), the majority of undergraduate business students are in their late teens and early 20s and have little to no professional work experience. Given this age gap, the generational divide among student populations is one dimension that separates our younger students from older ones. Many have written about how the ubiquitous access to the internet and social technology has impacted younger students’ learning styles (Proserpio & Gioia, 2007). Others have pointed to an increased level of narcissism and over-developed sense of entitlement and self-esteem that this younger ‘‘generation me’’ has compared to older students (Bergman, Westerman, & Daly, 2010; Robak, Chiffriller, & Zappone, 2007; Twenge, 2006). Each of these factors impacts how current, traditional undergraduates approach the learning environment differently than their older, graduate counterparts, and has implications for us as educators who are trying to foster graduates who value integrity.

9.3.2.

Work Experience and Skill Development

The average 28-year-old MBA student presumably has more work experience than the average undergraduate business major. Looking at the average work experience at each of the top ﬁve American MBA programs, as ranked by Business Week, those students average from 41 to 120 months work experience before entering their programs. This suggests a higher probability that MBA students have developed a broader set of skills and abilities than their undergraduate counterparts.

178

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

The implication for educators is that the graduate and undergraduate students differ signiﬁcantly in the professional experience on which they can draw as they study concepts. A recent survey of chief information ofﬁcers reinforces this idea by suggesting that college graduates (presumably mostly business majors) are not prepared for the real world of business, with young hires reportedly lacking skills in: project management (74%), business operations (71%), and interpersonal relationships (71%) (CIOinsight, 2004). Such ﬁndings imply that classroom objectives for typical undergraduates who lack signiﬁcant professional experience need to focus on strengthening particular skills and abilities toward appropriate professional levels, compared to MBA classes, which instead need to build on those students’ four to ﬁve years of professional experience. Furthermore, looking at undergraduate students as a whole, employers report overall inadequate levels of undergraduate preparation on foundational abilities such as critical thinking and analytical reasoning, writing, information literacy, creativity and innovation, complex problem solving, and intercultural competencies (AAC&U, 2007). Similarly, Bok (2006) argues that college students are underperforming in crucial areas such as critical thinking, writing, and quantitative reasoning. He also ﬁnds that only 10% of today’s college graduates are globally prepared. Even though ﬁndings such as these refer to undergraduates in general, we can infer these lack-of-skill issues exist for business graduates, given they comprise a majority of undergraduate majors who are entering the workforce today.

9.3.3.

Developmental Stages

The majority of traditional undergraduates fall into an age group loosely classiﬁed as youth, which is a transition time between adolescence (14–19 years old) and adulthood (generally occurring by mid 20s) (Brooks, 2008). MBA students, on the contrary, traditionally fall into the adulthood category. The youth brain is continuing to develop physically, as are their social abilities and self-perception, and a stream of educational research has suggested that adolescent and youth learners are indeed different from adult learners (i.e., Kasworm, 1980; Lankard, 1997). For example, Lampe (1997) traces literature over 20 years illustrating that decisionmaking capabilities in traditional undergraduate college students are subordinate to the ethical reasoning abilities in older, more mature, adult populations. Furthermore, psychosocial development theories suggest that important emotional intelligence and personal identity development occur during the traditional undergraduate years (Chickering, 1969; Chickering & Reisser, 1993; King & Kitchener, 1994; Perry, 1970), which further suggests that 18–23 year olds are likely to be at a more basic level of moral complexity than the moral reasoning capacity of their adult MBA counterparts. Considering these various dynamics simultaneously, we argue that undergraduate management students in particular are ripe for a liberal educational approach that will holistically nurture and develop their various skills and development levels, balancing their need for acquisition of content knowledge and personal development, while

Return to Liberal Education

179

simultaneously fostering holistic understanding of the business world which they will lead. Tomorrow depends on how we educate today. The question becomes, what does that liberal educational model look like in business and how is it delivered effectively?

9.4. Re-Thinking How to Teach for Integrity We convened a three-year action research project that engaged multiple stakeholder groups in virtual and face-to-face dialogues to begin answering this very question (detailed in Neville et al., 2007). Using a strength-based, whole-systems approach (detailed in Godwin & Neville, 2008), we sought input from four management education stakeholder groups — teacher-scholars, administrators, business students, and business practitioners. After an initial discovery phase with 48 people to begin lifting up the speciﬁc capabilities and attributes that undergraduate business majors should have upon graduation, a two-day face-to-face summit was held with representatives from 20 different institutions across four stakeholder groups (i.e., students, faculty, administrators, alumni, and business leaders) to further articulate what a liberal educational model for business students needs to look like to prepare undergraduates speciﬁcally for today’s rapidly changing business world. Guided by the overarching question: ‘‘what should a liberal undergraduate business education look like?’’ participants developed a collective vision regarding ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘how’’ we should be teaching undergraduate business majors. Interestingly, there was much agreement on the fundamental elements that should comprise a liberal undergraduate business education. Despite this philosophical accord, in reality it was quickly determined that no single university’s program was already successfully implementing a true liberal education, although different elements were being instituted at different schools. Common obstacles to full programmatic implementation include cultural entrenchment in academic silos, institutional prioritization of research over teaching innovation, and faculty burn-out. We explore these obstacles further later in this chapter. First though, we detail here the competencies, pedagogical approaches, and philosophical tensions that emerged from these discussions. On the basis of these insights, we then model one way to conceptualize these dynamics at play in a whole-system view of creating liberal education.

9.4.1.

Liberal Management Education Core Competencies

Our action research process revealed a wide array of competencies believed to be important speciﬁcally for undergraduate students to have upon completion of a business degree, and thus the outcome goals for a liberal education. Table 9.1 details these competencies broadly grouped into three categories: (a) Measurable Knowledge & Skills, competencies that can be speciﬁcally and objectively measured; (b) Personal Traits or Qualities, competencies that students develop within themselves which are more subjective and less-measurable in nature; and (c) Future Actions, Decisions & Behaviors,

180

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Table 9.1: Competencies important for undergraduate students. Type of competency

Speciﬁc competencies

(a) Measurable knowledge & skills

Basic literacy in: Mathematics English writing skills Reading and analyzing text and data Communication skills (writing, oral, and critical listening) Information literacy (including technology skills) Foreign language competency Basic understanding of major disciplines (i.e., Humanities & Arts, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences) Basic understanding of traditional business areas: Accounting Business law Economics (micro and macro) Finance Marketing Management Global and cultural awareness of current issues and their historical context

(b) Personal traits or qualities

Adaptability, such as: Appreciation of non-linearity in the world Comfort with ambiguity Appreciation and respect for the natural environment Critical thinking and analytic reasoning ability Creativity Critical and active listening ability (beyond basic communication) Ethical behavior and moral imagination, such as: Awareness of right and wrong (or ability to ponder this) Willingness to act on ‘‘right’’ Diverse opinions and ideas, such as: Ability to embrace multiple perspectives Awareness ‘‘beyond the self’’ including other people and the environment Sensitivity to dimensions of diversity (i.e., gender, religious, cultural, physical, social, and economic)

Return to Liberal Education

181

Table 9.1: (Continued ) Type of competency

Speciﬁc competencies Interpersonal competency such as: Self awareness Ability to work collaboratively with others Conﬂict resolution skills

(c) Future actions, decisions, and behaviors

Demonstrated leadership within organizations and society Engaged citizenship Ongoing critical inquiry and life-long, self-directed learning Effective decision making including abilities to Analyze situations Seek out and use useful information Balance multiple perspectives Recognize impact of decisions on others/ environment Articulate and defend decisions

actions students demonstrate throughout their lives and careers (Neville et al., 2007, p. 41). As an industry, our focus tends to remain on the objective domain, ‘‘measurable knowledge and skills.’’ Yet, all three competency areas need to ﬂourish for the full beneﬁt of a liberal undergraduate management education. Thus it is important to recognize when we design curricula that aim at fostering measurable skills, business competencies, and basic literacy in English, math, and communications, we need to balance this with curricula that cultivate an understanding of the role of business in society in relationship with history, philosophy, literature, culture, and the natural environment.

9.4.2.

Important Pedagogies

In addition to articulating ‘‘what’’ abilities undergraduate business students should have, there were also many ideas shared regarding ‘‘how’’ educational programs should go about developing the competencies detailed above. Pedagogically, participants advocated for integration between practical experiences, reﬂection opportunities, conceptualization activities, and application opportunities — the four domains needed for effective learning according to Kolb’s (1986) seminal work on learning theory. Summarized in Table 9.2, data suggested that to maximize the educational environment, multiple pedagogical strategies need to be concurrently employed. For example, the traditional ‘‘lecture course’’ loses educational value until

182

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Table 9.2: Curricular and pedagogical approaches. Type of pedagogical activity

Speciﬁc activities

(a) Practical experiences

Professional internships Volunteer and civic projects Interacting with professionals (i.e., interviewing, shadowing) Intercultural experiences (e.g., study abroad, multicultural teams) Foreign language usage Group and team project work with focus-related skills practice Faculty role-modeling in the classroom: Promoting critical stances Teaching from multiple perspectives Reﬂecting Asking

(b) Reﬂection opportunities

Faculty mentoring Self-analysis processes and tools (e.g., Myers Briggs assessment, learning styles indicators) Activities that engage mind, heart, and soul Activities that have no one right answer

(c) Conceptualization activities

(d) Application opportunities

Case studies Current affairs readings and real-life examples Creative and artistic projects and exposure Interdisciplinary collaboration by faculty (‘‘beyond bridges’’): Embedded and integrated ideas across courses Challenging the artiﬁcial divide between business, liberal arts, and other disciplines Making connections between classes Lectures Literature and arts in the classroom Research projects Socratic method Writing papers

Role playing Individual-focused pedagogies including individual projects Business decision-making opportunities Public speaking through presentations and debate

Return to Liberal Education

183

companioned with forms of application and experiential learning. Similarly, a civic engagement course needs solid theoretical grounding in order for students to adequately conceptualize the activities’ meaning. Although the teacher-scholars engaged in the inquiry process reported being facile at drawing on a wide variety of pedagogical approaches, they also reported little university-wide emphasis on building all faculty’s skills at or rewarding faculty for drawing on a wide variety of pedagogical approaches. In fact, participant experiences mirrored the Van Fleet and Peterson (2005) argument that good teaching is a second-class achievement in our researchdriven ﬁeld. Findings suggest that until we consistently and actively convert knowledge into actualized learning (Blood, 2006), our educational system remains inadequate. Taking the insights from this process, we turn our attention now to modeling these different considerations and activities into a framework from which educators can construct whole-system dialogues about what and how to shape an effective liberal curriculum that aligns with their particular institution and students’ needs.

9.5. A Model for Integrated, Liberal Management Education Experiences Given the diverse skills and capacities needed in our graduates, coupled with the developmental differences detailed above, we recognize the challenge educators face to design any curricula, let alone curricula with the lofty goal of fostering integrity. Furthermore, we recognize that no normative solutions exist about what educational design is ‘‘best.’’ What we can do, however, is to begin mapping the domains that need attention within the overall educational system if we are to create integrated, liberal education experiences for our students. Thus, our model is not designed to be a ‘‘one-size-ﬁts-all’’ approach, but a guide for management educators to help outline the systemic picture of multiple interdependent variables and stakeholders they need to address as educators strive to create the ideal liberal educational model in their own university system (Figure 9.1). First, we discuss the major elements in the model in order to clarify the intention of and relationship between each element. Then, we discuss the larger implications of the whole-system picture, major emergent dilemmas that all educational designers should be considering.

9.5.1.

Curricular and Classroom Concerns

The inner-most circle of the model represents what is going on in our individual classrooms as elaborated in the core competencies and pedagogies sections earlier. The overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: What balance of functional skills development and personal development best serves our students? As we quickly learned from our discussions and insights from the literature, there is no uniform agreement regarding what the ‘‘right’’ balance is for focusing on one competency versus another. The essential need when developing a curriculum,

184

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Figure 9.1: Model for lntegrated liberal education however, is to create a workable equilibrium between concrete skills which are measurable and easier to explain in the short-term and more amorphous personality development that has implications for long-term behaviors. For example, students and parents might presume that an undergraduate major must provide a set of technical, practical skills easily recognizable by recruiters as job-ready training. However, as we have discussed, traditional undergraduate students are at a stage of development where, if rich attention can be allocated towards blending disciplinary approaches to problem solving, then the student’s increased cogitative complexity will better serve the student for a lifetime of learning than had the student been skilled in silos of existing thought. And even among blended approaches, a decision will be needed about the emphasis to place on disparate skills such as numeric literacy and emotional intelligence. These are basic examples of curricular and classroom trade-offs. Arguably, an educational experience should do both, teach the basic literacy competencies and develop a responsible and imaginative mind. However, as we explore below, dilemmas quickly surface when the reality of prioritizing sets in.

9.5.2.

Systemic Inﬂuences

John Dewey, a great educational reformer, once wrote, ‘‘we never educate directly, but indirectly by means of the environment’’ (1944, p. 19). Thus, while course-level suggestions are a beginning point for enhancing education, deep change rests with

Return to Liberal Education

185

coordinated attention and activity at multiple levels within the university environment. A systems perspective is needed to truly meet the developmental needs of all business students. Thus, our model suggests that in addition to looking at what is happening in the classroom, we must also look to cultivate actions at other levels within the university system — represented by the outer dotted circle in the model. The overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: What are the forces and who are the stakeholder groups most inﬂuencing our curriculum decisions and design? As each university explores this area for itself, they need to pay heed to the overarching culture of their speciﬁc university. Is it one that fosters and rewards teaching excellence? What are the faculty philosophies of education and how are they impacting curriculum design? Each institution will presumably have its own unique set of both strengths upon which to build and challenges they face. Looking beyond the campus is important as well, to consider both the existing and potential relationships that the school has with the business community. Whether through networking, recruiting, or co-curricular engagement or disengagement, members of the business community inﬂuence the educational experience. All these pieces become building blocks for creating a truly integrated liberal education for students.

9.5.3.

Beyond the Classroom

As Paulo Freire, an educational reformer, writes, ‘‘No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed [i.e. the student] by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption’’ (1970, p. 54). This provocative statement, while revolutionary in tone, has implications for a holistic model of liberal education. As educational designers, we must not only attend to helping build students’ capacity for critical inquiry, but we must also consider ways to encourage students to actively engage in shaping their own questions, their own decisions, and their own destinies. Thus, in our model, students are not without responsibility for their own development as well. The overarching question for educators to consider within this realm is: Who are our unique students and how can we support their role in creating an effective educational experience for themselves? Thus, the overlapping oval in the model represents the role students must play in internalizing their own liberal education experience. Although a characteristic of youth-learners is that they do not always take active responsibility for their learning process, students must be held somewhat accountable for navigating their educational experience in a way that meets their developmental needs. Such responsibilities will help them succeed not only in our classrooms but also in the everchanging world they will face after graduation. For example, a student choosing to simply follow instruction might develop basic literacy in the models and tactics business textbooks explain. However, a student who chooses to select among broad

186

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

disciplines of courses and actively seek conversations with faculty to compare and contrast the different underlying assumptions will intrinsically be maximizing her own educational opportunity. The curriculum can insist a student take general education requirements, but the students’ experience moving through those courses varies widely. Through formal and informal advising, career services, and engaged student services staff, universities can build the infrastructure to help foster integrated learning experiences, yet students must choose to engage in these activities. Students who do are likely to experience their education as far more ‘‘whole’’ than those who do not. An integrated, liberal, management education as modeled here involves a convergence of experiences and inﬂuences far more expansive than curriculum alone. It rests on the pivotal choices curricular designers must make to balance an institution’s philosophy of education, strategic objectives, and organizational strengths. And these choices often involve changing the traditional way that our educational systems have been run. Just as Kurt Lewin (1951) suggested that any organization must consider external forces that are working to support or impede a desired change, so too must we consider the inﬂuences in our system working to perpetuate or change the status quo.

9.5.4.

Transforming the Parts into a New Whole: Tensions and Dilemmas

We outline here three major tensions that emerged throughout our inquiry. These are critical areas where stakeholder communities must collaboratively discuss, reﬂect, and ultimately agree if a particular institution’s educational reform can be successful. Reconciling — or at least attending to these issues — is crucial to the success of an integrated liberal education because the whole must function in concert rather than disparate parts working in discord. First, balancing the degree of attention that any one competency area receives in the classroom begs the larger question, ‘‘what are we trying to accomplish?’’ For example, institutional decision makers recognize that parents and recruiters want education models that are ‘‘useful’’ and that prepare students for a particular job. However, the aspirational nature of the model itself calls on educators to shift the responsibility for ‘‘job-skilling’’ onto the student, who should be encouraged to seek out internships and work experiences to bolster their practical experience and begin building professional networks. As students increasingly take ownership of developing themselves outside the classroom, then educators can draw on these experiences in classroom activities, helping students integrate their conceptual and practical learning. A second example of balancing educational objectives appears when discussing the degree to which an education should instill intellectual knowledge and the degree to which the experience should develop the individual personhood. And with intellectual knowledge, how much should be disciplinary speciﬁc and how much should be grounded in broader areas of study? Again, the balance between how much of which is the ‘‘right’’ amount remains controversial

Return to Liberal Education

187

even when all components are deemed important. Therefore, the tension is strong between, on the one hand, peoples’ expectations of immediate usefulness of an education, and on the other hand, the long-term potential developmental inherent in having contextual awareness. Second, assessment drives many curricular decisions. Standardized testing creates an ability to compare some quantiﬁed value across institutions. However, our current forms of standardized testing only assess certain competencies deemed signiﬁcant. Furthermore, economies of scale associated with large lecture halls rather than individualized and small group learning tend to push curricular assessment further toward standardization. Another assessment issue is that our education system divides evaluation of student performance into 12- and 16-week units of time. For many of the identiﬁed competencies, however, students have not yet behaviorally absorbed the experiences within the length of a semester. Therefore, because of our industry and modern social push for measuring immediate outcomes, a majority of our educational emphasis gets placed on the one measurable dimension, traditional skills and knowledge acquisitions. The contradiction between educating for a world of innovation and complexity, yet educating within academic systems that emphasize short-term assessment of traditional skills and knowledge mirrors a problem in our business world: the short-term focus on ﬁnancial returns with a simultaneous longterm hope for innovative possibility. Over-emphasizing either jeopardizes the goal. Third, a major tension that arose in our inquiry was the question of whose value system should be instilled into tomorrow’s leaders? The dominant Western capitalist paradigm is in ﬂux. Even since the turn of this century, a rise in social entrepreneurialism has begun to re-shape the business landscape. With emerging shifts in economic power from the United States to China and India, educators have reason to suspect that tomorrow’s leaders will be faced with a far more complex set of philosophical differences than were yesterday’s leaders. Our time horizon matters too — ancient wisdom traditions have been all but extinguished from the business arena with the rise of industrialization. This poses a dilemma for people seeking to integrate spirituality into business culture, Eastern philosophy into innovation processes, and sustainability into current economic priorities. Questioning the role of business in society quickly leads to questioning the role of the government in managing the landscape and questioning the degree of accountability that individuals have for organizations’ behaviors. Sorting out whose value system should be taught raises complex dilemmas for educators. These tensions and dilemmas are not insurmountable; they actually fuel the potential for innovation at any particular institution. In fact, knowing the questions to ask is part of what we want our students to learn also.

9.6. Conclusions and Recommendations Many questions obviously remain about how to best construct liberal education environments. While each individual institution must answer the questions we have

188

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

raised for themselves to create a curriculum that works for their unique students, there are various interventions that can be done to help facilitate transformation. For example, working within our spheres of inﬂuence as faculty at an institutional level, we can seek to involve our university presidents, provosts, and academic deans toward creating a whole-system, liberal educational model. We can also work to build bridges with social science, humanities, and natural science colleagues by hosting faculty discussion sessions, participating in cross-disciplinary development or writing groups, and informally discussing the potential social value of business; all such activities encourage bridge-building with non-business faculty. Such crossdisciplinary connections will help lead to an innovative environment that not only strengthens our curricula (Smith, Hornsby, & Kite, 2000) but also advances students’ ethical development (Sims & Brinkman, 2003). Within our own classrooms, we can shift the paradigm of how students perceive their experiences by incorporating context from other disciplines into our own course materials, draw on examples in class that maximize the ways in which students begin to make meaning from their own extracurricular activities, and integrate new pedagogical approaches at every turn. Even though most business faculty are not formally trained in natural sciences or the arts, we are each adequately aware of the world’s complexity and bring related ideas into our discussions. We can also begin recognizing the unique developmental needs of our undergraduate management students, honoring that they need more than just a mini-MBA. Given the impressionable developmental stage at which our undergraduate students enter our classrooms, we must realize that they look to us with more deference as authority ﬁgures than do older, adult learners. Therefore, it is even more important that we strive to model not only skills, but also appropriate behaviors. If we intend to establish conﬁdence and self-identity, a sense of personal integrity, and mature relationships, we must model civility in our own behavior in all of our interactions, with both our students and our other institutional colleagues. Faculty can also role model ethical behaviors through a variety of classroom interactions — from managing discussions to grading papers with transparency and fairness. Role modeling does not end at the faculty level. We must also encourage our institutions to ‘‘walk the talk’’ when it comes to integrity. Authors like Boyle (2004) have suggested that business schools especially need to be models of social responsibility and sustainability if we expect to create students who value such actions. One by one, if collectively engaged, we can begin to shift the equilibrium point of how undergraduate management education occurs toward a liberal, integrated model. As we seek to make these shifts, we should keep in mind the AAC&U’s articulation of the purpose of undergraduate education, In the ﬁnal analysis, the challenge of college, for students and faculty members alike, is empowering individuals to know that the world is far more complex than it ﬁrst appears, and that they must make interpretive arguments and decisions — judgments that entail real consequences for which they must take responsibility and from which they may not ﬂee by disclaiming expertise. (1991, p. 16–17)

Return to Liberal Education

189

Our hope is that collectively, we as educators will live up to this lofty call to action and expand our capacity for enhancing the experience of and developmental opportunities for traditional undergraduate students so they can become effective, integrious leaders of tomorrow’s organizations. This chapter argues for doing so by returning to a holistic management education through the tradition of liberal education.

Acknowledgments We wish to extend our gratitude to the James S. Kemper Foundation and Southwestern University for collaboratively sponsoring the 2006 summit, Reenvisioning Business Programs in Liberal Arts Worlds, from which the actionresearch portions of this work emerged. We have continued to beneﬁt from the practices, imaginations, and intellectual generosity of every summit participant, a multitude of colleagues nationwide, and countless reviewers, without whom this work would not have been possible. Most importantly, we have been sustained and inspired by those closest to us who share our passion for making the world a better place through transformative education and lifelong learning.

References Association of American Colleges. (1991). The challenge of connecting learning. Project on liberal learning, study-in-depth, and the arts and sciences major. Washington, DC. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2007). College learning for the new global century, Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http:// www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_ﬁnal.pdf. Accessed on January 16, 2011. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2011). What is liberal education? Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/leap/what_is_liberal_education.cfm. Accessed on January 16, 2011. Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). (2009). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation. Retrieved from http://www.aacsb.edu/ accreditation/standards.asp. Accessed on November 2, 2009. Athavale, M., Davis, R., & Myring, M. (2008). The integrated business curriculum: An examination of perceptions and practices. Journal of Education for Business, 83(5), 295–301. Atwater, B. J., Kannan, V. R., & Stephens, A. A. (2008). Cultivating systemic thinking in the next generation of business leaders. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 9–25. Bendheim, L., Waddock, S., & Graves, S. B. (1998). Educating holistic professionals in a world of wicked problems. Business and Society, 37(3), 306–338. Bennis, W., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 85(5), 96–104. Bergman, J., Westerman, J., & Daly, J. (2010). Narcissism in management education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(1), 119–131. Blood, M. R. (2006). Only you can create actionable knowledge. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 209–212.

190

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Bok, D. (2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice & leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publications. Boyle, M. E. (2004). Walking our talk: Business schools, legitimacy, and citizenship. Business and Society, 43(1), 37–68. Brooks, R. (2008). Youth and lifelong learning. In: P. Jarvis (Ed.), International handbook of lifelong learning (pp. 33–44). London: Routledge. Campbell, N., Heriot, K., & Finney, R. (2006). In defense of silos: An argument against the integrative undergraduate business curriculum. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 316–332. Chew, E. B., & McInnis-Bowers, C. (2004). Blending liberal art and business education. Liberal Education, 90(1)n.p.. Chickering, A. W. (1969). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. CIOinsight. (2004, November 11). Whose job is it to teach business skills? CIOinsight, n.p. DeMoranville, C., Aurand, T. W., & Gordan, G. L. (2000). The delivery of an undergraduate crossfunctional, business principles program: One university’s continuing journey. Marketing Education Review, 10(3), 29–41. Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Free Press. Donaldson, L. (2002). Damned by our own theories: contradictions between theories and management education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(1), 96–106. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum. Godwin, L., & Neville, M. G. (2007, October). Designing a degree that works: Rethinking undergraduate management education. Paper presented at the meeting of the Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, Reno, NV. Godwin, L., & Neville, M. G. (2008). Learning from a whole-system, strength-based approach: A case of collaborative curriculum development. Journal of Quality & Participation, 31(1), 11–14. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(1), 75–91. Giacalone, R. (2004). A transcendent business education for the 21st century. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(4), 415–420. Jones, R. T. (2005). Liberal education for the twenty-ﬁrst century: Business expectations. Liberal Education (Spring), 32–37. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/ le-sp05/LEAP_SP05.pdf. Kasworm, C. E. (1980). The older student as an undergraduate. Adult Education, 31(1), 30–47. Khurana, R. (2007). From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulﬁlled promise of management as a profession. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Kimball, B. A. (1996). A historical perspective. In: N. H. Farnham & A. Yarmolinsky (Eds), Rethinking liberal education (pp. 11–35). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reﬂective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Return to Liberal Education

191

Kolb, D. (1986). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lampe, M. (1997). Increasing effectiveness in teaching ethics to undergraduate business students. Teaching Business Ethics, 1(1), 3–19. Lankard, B. B. (1997). New learning strategies for generation X. ERIC Clearinghouse on adult, career, and vocational education, Columbus, OH (ERIC Digest No. 184). Laszlo, C., & Zhexembayeva, N. (2011). Embedded sustainability. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler. Morgan, G. (1996). Images of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2006). Proﬁle of undergraduates in US postsecondary education institutions: 2003-04. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid¼2006184. Accessed on November 21, 2009. Navarro, P. (2008). The MBA core curricula of top-ranked U.S. business schools: A study in failure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 109–123. Nesteruk, J. (2005). A liberal model for professional education. Liberal Arts Online, 5(8)n.p. Neville, M. G., Godwin, L., Senchack, A. J., & Parks, D. (2007). Re-envisioning business programs in liberal arts worlds: 2006 summit proceedings and outcomes. Southwestern University. Retrieved from http://www.southwestern.edu/laab/laab-resource_bank.html. Accessed on June 20, 2007. Obermueler, S. R. (1993). A Delphi study to build a model integrative curriculum for an undergraduate business program in a liberal arts setting (doctoral dissertation, Walden University, 1993). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(09A), 2689. Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Proserpio, L., & Gioia, D. (2007). Teaching the virtual generation. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(1), 69–80. Raelin, J. (2008). Toward an epistemology of practice. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(4), 495–515. Robak, R., Chiffriller, S., & Zappone, M. (2007). College students’ motivations for money and subjective well-being. Psychological Reports, 100(1), 147–156. Ruegger, D., & King, E. W. (1992). A study of the effect of age and gender upon student business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(3), 179–186. Schneider, C. G. (2000). Greater expectations. Liberal Education, 86(2), 1–3. Schweitzer, K. (2005). MBA programs vs. executive MBA programs: What’s the difference? Guide to Business Majors. Retrieved from http://businessmajors.about.com/od/programcomparison/a/mba_vs_emba.htm. Accessed on December 3, 2009. Segal, D. (2010). In pursuit of the perfect brainstorm. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Industry-t.html?_r2&pagewanted¼1. Accessed on December 16, 2010. Senchack, A. J. (2007). On liberal arts education in the business curriculum: A discussion paper for the 2006 summit on the liberal arts in business. In: M. G. Neville, L. Godwin, A. J. Senchack & D. Parks (Eds), Re-envisioning business programs in liberal arts worlds: 2006 summit proceedings and outcomes (pp. 22–37). Georgetown, TX: Southwestern University. Retrieved from http://www.southwestern.edu/laab/laab-resource_bank.html. Accessed on June 20, 2007.

192

Mary Grace Neville and Lindsey Godwin

Sims, R., & Brinkman, J. (2003). Business ethics curriculum design: Suggestions and illustrations. Teaching Business Ethics, 7(1), 69–86. Smith, B., Hornsby, J., & Kite, M. (2000). Broadening the business curriculum via a crossdisciplinary approach. Education, 120(4), 713–721. Solis, B. (2011). Rethinking the future of business part 1: The state of corporate social media. Fast Company. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/1720285/rethinking-thefuture-of-business-part-1-the-state-of-corporate-social-media. Accessed on January 24, 2011. Thomas, R. R., Thomas, D. A., Ely, R. J., & Meyerson, D. (2002). Harvard Business Review on managing diversity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Thurston, E. (2000). Enabling systems thinking in the ‘‘Mesonic millennium’’: The need for systemic methodologies for conceptual learning in undergraduate management education. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 1–31. Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation me: Why today’s young Americans are more conﬁdent, assertive, entitled — and more miserable than ever before. New York, NY: Free Press. Van Fleet, D. D., & Peterson, T. O. (2005). Increasing the value of teaching in the academic marketplace: The creation of a peer-review infrastructure for teaching. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(4), 506–514. Wick, M., & Philips, A. (2008). A liberal education scorecard. Liberal Education, 94(1), 22–29. Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, P. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the clash of veterans, boomers, xers, and nexters in your workplace. New York, NY: AMACOM.

Chapter 10

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts Sarah Stookey

Abstract Purpose – Analyze limitations to and possibilities for business education that promotes a meaningful ethics. Evaluate relationships between culture, elitism, democracy, business, and undergraduate education in the United States. Describe how liberal arts perspective to undergraduate business education can promote greater integrity, illustrated with examples of teaching practices and university-wide collaboration. Consider institutional, intellectual, and social barriers to this effort. Methodology/approach – Historical analysis of trends in relationship between business, elitism, the liberal arts, and business education in the United States. Reﬂection and systematization of author’s experience. Findings – Because the U.S. educational system mirrors a society segregated by elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege it obstructs development of integrity in business. Adoption of approaches from liberal arts can be helpful. Practical implications – Outlines speciﬁc, strategies for introducing elements of liberal arts education into the undergraduate business classroom, based on teaching experience. Social implications – In light of misbehavior and irresponsibility antecedent to ﬁnancial collapse it is important to ask if there is an elite business class that is ‘‘in the know’’ and another layer of business workers ‘‘kept in the dark’’ and if this is the case, how this division came about. If business is to serve other than short-term and minority elite interests we need an educational system in which all students have opportunities to understand how business works/can work and also be exposed to ideas and traditions of liberal arts.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

194

Sarah Stookey

Originality/value of paper – Raises original questions and analysis about how social and economic segregation perpetuated by the U.S. system of higher education affects integrity in business and democracy in society. Proposes innovative strategies to reduce such segregation.

10.1. Introduction The Great Recession raises signiﬁcant questions about the enterprise of teaching ethics to the nation’s business students. For one, to what extent does the integrity of individual practitioners make any difference in thwarting the sorts of broad-scale fraud and irresponsibility that can wreck the economy? If we can answer this question positively the further question of particular concern to management educators is whether — and how — the courses we teach can foster students’ integrity. In this chapter I seek to elaborate on education for a meaningful ethics. My point of departure is that a meaningful ethics requires an awareness, understanding and appreciation of broad social, political, economic, and cultural interdependencies. Integrity requires a sense of integration and accountability (‘‘I am part of the larger world; my wellbeing depends on others’’). The challenge for management educators concerned with ethics is to encourage these qualities in contexts where their utility may not be readily apparent — and where immediate (and, particularly, proﬁt-denominated) utility is highly prized. Because these are sensibilities and perspectives that a liberal arts education characteristically fosters, I raise the question, how can management education for integrity be strengthened by incorporating the central features of traditional liberal arts education? Addressing this question raises important related issues. For example, to what degree have business programs segregated students from the larger intellectual life of the University? How have distinctions made between the liberal arts and management education inﬂuenced higher education’s historic mission (particularly in the United States) of increasing the scope and quality of democracy? Examining the 2008 ﬁnancial collapse in light of the differences between liberal arts and management education highlights issues of social distinction, power and moral responsibility. Historians of the Third Reich have long asked how the larger part of a seemingly ordinary, but educated population could blithely follow the commands of a patently immoral and corrupt regime. Or was there a sharp division between leaders ‘‘in the know’’ who were willing to engage collectively in the worst sorts of behavior witnessed in modern times and followers ‘‘in the dark,’’ the ‘‘good soldiers’’ who simply carried out what they of as legitimate orders? The literature remains divided (Goldhagen, 1996, Kershaw, 2000). We can raise a similar set of questions in connection with the misbehavior and irresponsibility antecedent to the ﬁnancial collapse. For instance, is there an elite business class that is ‘‘in the know’’ and another layer of business workers ‘‘kept in the dark’’? That is, did many of our business leaders anticipate the consequences of their questionable dealings (just as many experienced hedge fund managers and bankers ‘‘knew’’ that Bernard Madoff was a fraud all along), whereas the managers on the front lines who made the system run had little idea where their operations would lead? And if

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

195

this is the case, how did that division come about? One place we can look is the division between elite and para-professional or undergraduate business education. The chapter is structured as follows. An overview underscores the complexity of relationships between culture, elitism, democracy, business, and undergraduate education in the United States. This provides necessary context for understanding how a liberal arts perspective to business education can help to promote greater integrity as well as the institutional, intellectual, and social barriers this effort faces. The second half of the chapter describes key elements of a liberal arts approach to management education that can foster integrity, illustrated with examples of teaching practices and university-wide collaboration.

10.2. Liberal Arts, Management Education, and the Organization of Business — A Short History In the United States traditional liberal arts education and management education have very distinct yet tightly interlocking relationships to the organization of business. The complexity of this relationship was illustrated at a recent meeting of the American Association of Colleges and Schools of Businesses (AACSB). Reﬂecting hierarchies within the discipline, a panel of deans from elite graduate business schools (associated with renowned liberal arts colleges) had been invited to present their expertise to an audience of deans and others from non-elite undergraduate and graduate schools of business. The elite business schools occupy the highest echelons of management prestige, supplying the graduates, research, and policy with the most inﬂuence on the practice of business. And yet none of the deans from the elite schools held advanced degrees in business while the deans in the audience would not have hired faculty with nonbusiness degrees. In fact, to do so would threaten AACSB accreditation (which many of the most prestigious business schools do not bother with). How did we get to this situation and what do these contradictions suggest about efforts to incorporate the liberal arts into management education? Although the liberal arts have never played a strong role in management education, they have been and continue to be the basis of the education of managers, at least at the highest levels. In the United States, through the ﬁrst half of the 20th century, business discourse and norms were largely the product of elite colleges and universities, which served as ‘‘a paragon, a distinct social and professional model of higher education’’ (Kushner, 1999, p. 413). These schools, the majority of which were private, were guided by a vision of the liberal arts derived from classical European traditions, that ‘‘sought to advance humanity as well as secure freedom’’ (McKeon, 1968, p. 111). Public colleges and universities also promoted classical liberal arts education but this was balanced by the mandates for more explicitly practical education of the land grant (Key, 1996) and normal schools (Wright, 1930). The college education of the elites was not only, therefore a liberal arts education, but it

196

Sarah Stookey

was also, to a strong degree, deﬁned in contrast to the more vocational orientation of public higher education (Burke, 1983). Specialized academic preparation for ‘‘the professions’’ was largely limited to graduate schools of engineering, law, and medicine. Through the ﬁrst half of the 20th century business schools were incidental (Zimmerman, as cited in Pfeffer & Fong, 2002). Absent a need for speciﬁc technical expertise (not established until the later stages of the discipline), there was no need for the white, male elite to specialize in business. The prerogative not only to conduct business but also to lead major business organizations was not based on professional credentials — or even on demonstrated managerial ability — but on ethnic, cultural, and economic identities. Business was conducted in the white, male, upper-class voice of elite liberal arts colleges and universities — not because business was taught there but because those were the guys who ran things (Hall, 1982; Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Cultural elites had a ‘‘lock’’ on economics and business and it was not necessary to be speciﬁcally credentialed to be a leader in business. In fact, specialized credentials and even excessive familiarity with technical detail could be considered a liability if it seemed to overwhelm more ‘‘cultured’’ interests and expertise (Rossett). Among the elites in the United States business has been most acceptable when it is conducted inconspicuously and with certain difﬁdence. This contradiction, of the most powerful business participants’ resistance to overt association with business, is reﬂected in the absence of business education at elite liberal arts colleges and universities. A classical liberal arts education, as generally understood in elite social and academic circles, typically does not include courses in applied ﬁelds such as accounting or ﬁnance — even if graduates may go directly into careers on Wall Street (Roth, 2008). The few elite liberal arts schools that acknowledge the importance of understanding how business operates tend to do under cover of nonbusiness-y sounding titles, such as ‘‘Complex Organizations’’ (in the case of Mount Holyoke College). Not only have they not been taught about business but, strikingly, many students at these liberal arts schools have never even had paid jobs. Sustained by business they do not know it. Young people from the elites who enter business have tended to rely on opportunities afforded by family ownership, intermarriage, and social networks and not business expertise (much less academic business credentials). This may seem like an historical artifact. It is true that over time the student body of the elite liberal arts colleges and universities has become more diverse, less uniformly elite. However, up until relatively recently graduation from an elite liberal arts school was not only largely sufﬁcient to gain entry into the higher levels of business, it has been almost necessary (Rossett, undated). A French literature major from an Ivy League school was much more likely to be recruited for a management trainee position at a major investment bank, for example, than a ﬁnance major from a major public university. The linkage between elite liberal arts education and business leadership has been so tight that even for those not born to the elites immersion in the highest levels of the liberal arts has often been credential enough to gain entry. Business education is ‘‘treated as belonging to some other educational paradigm’’ (Kushner, 1999, p. 415) and only pursued, if necessary, at the graduate level, after a solid liberal arts base has been laid (McKeon, 1968).

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

197

The U.S. students who do study business as undergraduates therefore do so at non-elite schools where training in more directly practical skills is not only not depreciated but expressly valued. The history of land grant or teacher training public universities and the non-elite economic and social position of these students clearly validate such technical training as the express purpose of a college degree (Key, 1996; Wright, 1930). These students are much more likely than their peers at elite institutions to have come from working class families (Green, 1992; Leppel, 2001). They are much more likely to have, themselves, signiﬁcant work histories and ﬁrsthand exposure to the mechanics and purposes of business. They are familiar — in ways students at elite schools tend not to be — with the economic pressures to earn income, with the obstacles to fulﬁlling work, with the limitations capitalism imposes on the majority of working people. It is at these schools that the names of recent graduates who have passed the CPA exam are proudly exhibited. Another important element in the contradictory relationship between the liberal arts and business education has been the parallel trends of ‘‘academicization’’ and ‘‘scientiﬁcization’’ of management (Gordon & Howell, 1959; Pierson, 1959). The codiﬁcation of the discipline and creation of increasingly esoteric areas of study have contributed to an apparent ‘‘intellectualization’’ of business education and expertise. At the same time, the inclusion in the business academy of such seemingly attractive (and less overtly ‘‘business-like’’) areas as organizational development and environmental sustainability have seemed to broaden the scope of the discipline, affecting the perception of business education. As business has, in some ways, come to be seen as ‘‘less-business-y,’’ overt attention to it seems less offensive to elite sensibilities (the Aspen Institute exempliﬁes this kind of mainstreaming of business in academic circles). In the past decade increasing numbers of graduates of elite liberal arts colleges and universities chose a business career (Rimer, 2008). The barriers between the liberal arts and business education have been further weakened by two related phenomena, increased vocationalism in higher education (Pace & Connolly, 2000) and the ‘‘businessization’’ of some of the liberal arts canon. Not only most notably economics, but also other social sciences, have become focused on evernarrower technical and behavioral concerns, often directly subordinate to ﬁnancial efﬁciency criteria (Birnik & Billsberry, 2008; Huehn, 2008). In some ways this tendency allows for certain common grounds between business and ‘‘the disciplines.’’ On the contrary, in many colleges and universities, it contributes to a sense of encroachment and increased resentment toward business education. There is both melding and heightened entrenchment between the two educational projects. The curricular orientation and institutional culture of undergraduate business programs reﬂects the more conventional — and less liberal arts-inﬂected — understanding of what constitutes business education: more instrumental, more technique-oriented. And this is probably a reasonable bias if the goal is employability. Given the elitism that privileges liberal arts graduates from elite schools, non-elite business undergraduates face almost insurmountable hurdles in being considered for the kind of entry level jobs which will lead to the higher managerial echelons. But accommodation to this reality is self-perpetuating: because it does not incorporate liberal arts concerns, undergraduate business education does not tend to facilitate the qualities expected of elite business leaders.

198

Sarah Stookey

The history of the relationship between the liberal arts and business education suggests several important challenges to integrating the liberal arts in business education at the undergraduate (therefore non-elite) schools. First, there are long-standing cultural and institutional barriers that divide the two forms of education. Second, despite these apparent differences and in signiﬁcant ways, both approaches serve to prepare people to participate in business, albeit in very different and hierarchical roles. Therefore, and third, the differences between liberal arts and business education have as much to do with social privilege (both inherited and conveyed in schools) as curricular content and method. A fourth and ﬁnal challenge, beyond the scope of this chapter but very important, is to consider how integrity in business would be strengthened by addressing the elitism which (a) keeps many non-elite students out of liberal arts schools, thereby excluding important knowledge of business and its effects from the management power structure and (b) incorporating more direct exposure to the operations of business in elite liberal arts curricula. The remainder of the chapter focuses on ways a liberal arts approach can be implemented in a management classroom. The conclusion outlines possibilities for collaborating in the business school and across campus to support effective education for integrity, identify common interests and beneﬁt from a more comprehensive perspective.

10.3. How Can the Liberal Arts Strengthen the Integrity of Undergraduate Management Students? Why is elite liberal arts education so valued by people of inﬂuence in business? Social class and afﬁnities of privilege are certainly powerful. To a degree elite liberal arts schools serve as a cultural and social screening mechanisms, validating graduates as comfortable with (if not born into) hierarchies of power. That stamp of approval cannot be imported to undergraduate business programs at non-elite schools. But an elite liberal arts education also can develop skills and knowledge which bring demonstrable beneﬁt to business organizations. Half a century ago Nelson (1958) wrote, ‘‘A number of leading corporation executives have come to the conclusion that a broad liberal education — as distinct from vocational training — is a most desirable part of preparation for business leadership and that such an education becomes more urgently necessary as business becomes more complex’’ (p. 281). Such opinions were reﬂected in the creation of programs such as the Institute of Humanistic Studies for Executives at the University of Pennsylvania (Nelson, 1958). In analyzing corporate tendencies to hire liberal arts graduates, Salem and Grabarek (1986), highlighted the value placed on the ability to ‘‘see things not ordinarily connected, and then connect them’’ (p. 274). And in a 2007 opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, two former assistant U.S. Secretaries of Education and members of the Koret Task Force on K-12 Education at the Hoover Institution wrote, that ‘‘The liberal arts make us ‘competitive’ in the ways that matter most’’ (Finn & Ravitch, 2007). I would suggest seven characteristics of a liberal arts education are most critically lacking from much undergraduate management education. These are (1) emphasis on

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

199

the ‘‘big picture’’ and how it relates to the immediate and personal, (2) recognition of underlying assumptions and how they shape perception, (3) noninstrumental attention to social phenomena, (4) knowledge of major historical turning points and periods, (5) respect for the expressive potential of a broad range of disciplinary realms, including the arts, (6) global and local geo-political awareness, and (7) the self-conﬁdence to address a wide range of issues and value personal experience and opinions. The elements are not distinct; in teaching practice they often overlap. As a whole they compose the traditional elements of a liberal arts education. Combined with the core of a more traditional management curriculum and the students’ experience of business, they promote greater integrity in business conduct. These elements constitute not simply content (to be added to a management curriculum) but a personal stance. It is this stance, as much as (if not more than) familiarity with the liberal arts canon that has distinguished the graduates of elite liberal arts colleges — and what has seemed to recommend them for leadership in business. The stance consists not only of depth and breadth of intellectual knowledge but also of self-conﬁdence and a felt right and responsibility to participate in the most inﬂuential arenas — of business but also politics, culture, and science. In the elite liberal arts graduate who enters the business world, often without exposure to or personal experience of the human effects of business, this stance can result in dangerous hubris and inattention to the social consequences of business’ actions. For the undergraduate in a (non-elite) business program, this stance is a necessary corrective. As non-elites management students have been largely excluded from or oppressed by spheres of inﬂuence they are, often quite reasonably, alienated from the world beyond the familiar. Keeping abreast of developments of public life writ large, for example, is not only unfamiliar, but seems pointless. Although alienation from structures of power may be completely appropriate, disassociation and lack of involvement in making change is not. To become morally engaged in the larger structures of business these students need to exposure to many areas of intellectual content they are not familiar with. But they need, just as much, the capacity to value and articulate their own non-elite experience of and perspective on management, to be convinced they of their own potential for inﬂuence. They need to develop the instinct to question, cultivate strong voices not easily marginalized or dictated to, and build conﬁdence in their abilities to offer alternatives. Combined with these students’ personal experience of the more destructive aspects of business, liberal arts knowledge and this kind of stance can make it more possible for them to promote the broader social interests too often marginalized.

10.3.1. Ways to Bring the Liberal Arts into the Undergraduate Management Classroom This section describes in more depth the seven elements of liberal arts education which can enhance undergraduate business education, illustrated with examples from my own efforts to incorporate them in a variety of courses, from ‘‘Principles of Management’’ to advanced classes in ethics and globalization.

200

Sarah Stookey

10.3.2. The Big Picture Perhaps the most limiting quality of most undergraduate business education, in terms of promoting integrity, is its narrow focus and minimization of interdependence. If the scope of business perspective and priorities is limited it is more likely that the interests of a few, more powerful, stakeholders (i.e., majority owners) will be advanced at the expense of more numerous, less inﬂuential ones (i.e., employees, customers, and neighbors). Ideally, immersion in the liberal arts entails widening the range of factors and interests considered important, based on the presumption that social activity is the consequence of interactions (of people, ideas, and relationships) not formally, immediately, or overtly related. Results are attributed less to concerted, speciﬁc actions than to a conﬂuence of factors (Senge, 1990). Effective action or analysis is therefore understood to require detecting signiﬁcant relationships between elements more than focus on individual elements. It involves connecting dots and crossing apparent barriers. Sensitivity to interdependencies requires looking beyond familiar, immediate, and established interactions. Liberal arts students are encouraged to ask questions about the ‘‘meaning of life,’’ to ﬁnd themselves or their places in the world — existential questions that literature and philosophy raise. In the business realm this perspective is most closely reﬂected in strategy which, not surprisingly, is often a very challenging course for business undergraduates. A capstone strategy class that requires them to synthesize the distinct elements of accounting, ﬁnance, management, marketing, etc. is difﬁcult in part because of the emphasis on integration over specialization and prescribed procedures. In helping business undergraduates to see a Bigger Picture we face serious limitations. Liberal arts students may take semester-long courses that focus on the Roaring Twenties or Modern Islam. In the business classroom such connections have to be made apparent in more focused and simplistic ways. One simple method involves a diagram that places the individual (as both person and business participant) at the center off our concentric circles: local, state, national, and global (see Figure 10.1, Locating Ourselves). The concentric identities could be identiﬁed in other nongeographic and/or political ways as well, for example, ‘work’, ‘ethnicity’, ‘religion’, etc. The diagram provides a useful image and framework, throughout a business course, for calling attention to and analyzing the relevance of event, places, and dynamics that might not seem relevant to either students’ lives or business. Marked on the periphery, the pro-democracy movement in Tunisia, the cost of housing in Hartford, or ﬁnancial regulations in Washington become the subject of the questions, ‘‘How does this affect you?’’, How does this affect business in Connecticut?’’ and, ‘‘How do these affect each other? When the connections are indirect the discussion opens up new lines of thought. Eventually (on a blackboard and in students’ minds, I hope) the circles are embedded in an ever-changing thatch of crisscrossing lines or a freeform squiggle. The diagram becomes quite messy and unintelligible but the point is quite visible: the people, places, and issues that seem unrelated to our concerns can be central and we cannot advance our own interests without taking these others into account (Figure 10.2).

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

201

Figure 10.1: Locating Ourselves

Figure 10.2: Complex Interdependencies

10.3.3. Assumptions Given such complex interdependencies, acting with integrity becomes a matter of locating ourselves, making choices, and navigating to the best of our abilities. But here we confront questions about what is right and, even more fundamentally, what is possible. Evaluating and surpassing convention requires recognition of the conditions of knowledge and ‘‘breaking the tyranny of ﬁxed accepted facts reiﬁed as

202

Sarah Stookey

independent entities’’ (McKeon, 1968, p. 120).The Great Books-type programs and/or more extensive distribution requirements of a liberal arts education highlight the role of assumptions in shaping perception and the multiplicity of interpretative lens for considering social phenomena. In her analysis of methods for cultivating critical thinking used in elite liberal arts colleges, Tsui (2008) highlights the focus on ‘‘thinking outside the box’’ and asking ‘‘How do we know what we know?’’ Liberal arts students take logic, statistics, epistemology and methodology, etc. They also learn to read and think critically in classes ranging from poetry to philosophy to histories of science — the standard comparative analyses that develop competence in recognizing and articulating similarities and differences (Black, 1979). Business education, in contrast, tends to present norms and practices as received wisdom and to foster acceptance of established values and cultural perspectives of the business community (Alvesson & Deetz, 2000). The apparent authority of the precepts taught is reinforced by the massive textbooks it is often packaged in (textbooks being rarely used in non-science courses in the liberal arts). Students therefore tend to lack a sense of how inﬂuential and also mutable assumptions are. In order to strengthen their ability to act with integrity students need to be able to identify, analyze, and evaluate unstated assumptions in norms and behaviors. To introduce the role of assumptions I often use a short quiz. Questions may include the geographical (‘‘Is China bigger than Greenland?’’ and ‘‘Is Connecticut above Uruguay?’’), health (‘‘Are saturated fats bad for you?’’) and business-related (‘‘When CEOs own shares of their company the company is more proﬁtable — true or false?’’ and ‘‘When the economy is growing unemployment goes down — true or false?’’). Introducing different global map projections (Mercator, Peters, ‘‘upsidedown’’) and newspaper or journal articles reporting on such phenomena as low-carb diets and ‘‘jobless recoveries’’ stimulates discussion about why our knowledge of such apparently demonstrable information can be so varied. The effect of where, when, and how life histories, our economic position and cultural traditions, the impact of technology, national identity and global politics — we discuss how these affect our perception of what is true and how things work. And we discuss how useful our assumptions can be. Mercator’s projection is an enormous distortion of the world’s land masses but it served a vital function by facilitating 16th century navigation. Our assumptions, we recognize, help us move forward and collaborate with others because they limit our ﬁeld of vision (Figure 10.3). And so assumptions also obstruct a wider view. Students read Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and we spend a class discussing how assumptions may be so powerful that they obscure the true nature of our experience. So, while an economic moment may not feel like a recovery if you are un- or underemployed (as many students or members of their families are), other assumptions (i.e., that global competition dictates layoffs or that the unemployed are not sufﬁciently valuable) may make unemployment seem both inevitable and a necessary precursor of better times. It is very important, in these discussions, not to dictate interpretations by privileging certain assumptions. To develop the ability and inclination to articulate and examine assumptions students need to come to their own conclusions and listen to others discuss their assumptions without judgment. One way of walking this line is

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

203

Figure 10.3: The Role of Assumptions to refer to Truths and truths, distinguished by degree of disputability (while acknowledging that each person’s constellation will be different). Short readings representing different philosophical traditions (e.g., Locke, Rousseau, Sartre, the Hopi, and the Buddha) illustrate this point. Additional readings offer other concepts: paradigms (Kuhn, 1996) and organizing patterns (Hall, 1959) to underscore how assumptions change over time and culture. Greater sensitivity to assumptions — one’s own and others’ — promotes integrity by inhibiting the human inclination to assert inevitability in choices that advance particular interests at others’ expense. If businesses ‘‘have to’’ maximize proﬁt they ‘‘can’t’’ not outsource to low-wage countries. The point is not to paralyze decisionmaking or reduce all differences to opinion but to legitimize options that may seem unsanctioned and/or impossible.

10.3.4. Business as Social Phenomena A liberal arts approach emphasizes how institutions, norms, and practices evolve to advance particular interests in speciﬁc contexts and the value-laden choices and actions of individuals and groups. Liberal arts students learn about symbolism from a variety of sources — literature and media studies, anthropology, and sociology (Baudrillard, 1995). As a result they become adept at valuable skills such as interpreting class and ethnic cures, characterizing audiences and communicating with them accordingly, etc. In contrast, business education tends to present students with the institutions, norms, and practices of business as exogenous, an objective set of principles and techniques extensively detailed in textbooks. The impression conveyed is that business is largely value-neutral: businesses ‘‘have to’’ maximize proﬁts, managers ‘‘have to’’ promote efﬁciency, employees ‘‘have to’’ be productive. Management is treated as an instrumental practice.

204

Sarah Stookey

Perhaps the most radical shift a liberal arts approach brings to business education is to consider business not as a set of techniques and imperatives but as a subject of study, similar to economics or literature. The emphasis is not ‘‘how to use the techniques’’ but rather, ‘‘what is it?’’, resulting in more open inquiry and analysis of basic building blocks of business that tend to be taken for granted or ignored, including ‘‘work,’’ ‘‘pay,’’ and ‘‘proﬁt.’’ These can be examined ‘‘from the ground up;’’ trying to understand and evaluate the different ways in each can be constituted differently and not automatically adopting as mandatory the most familiar versions. For example, techniques of employee control (a prominent topic in introductory textbooks) can be considered in terms of values: ‘‘why do managers get to tell people what to do?’’ and ‘‘Why do employees need to be controlled?’’ The idea that managerial prerogative could be considered contingent makes a lot of sense to young people who have worked in service or retail organizations where they often perceive their (frequently underpaid and overworked) managers as relatively unintelligent and lacking in personal authority. The goal of discussing the basis of managerial authority is not simply to subvert. It is intended to encourage students to articulate and defend or critique the values embedded in managerial practice. The concept of proﬁt is also offers important lines of questioning. Class discussion of the basic accounting equation, ‘‘Revenue minus Costs equals Proﬁt ’’ provides many opportunities for posing questions about values. Why does capital get a proﬁt? What apparently positive values (such as efﬁciency) are attributed to proﬁt maximization? What assumptions are made about the distributive effects of markets? What are the effects of using market standards as benchmarks for rates of proﬁt? What are the implications of treating labor as a cost? The mere voicing of such questions is an important statement about the need for active ethical engagement. Understanding business as socially constructed requires acknowledging there is any number of ways to conduct it. In order to illustrate the wide range of possibilities I introduce students to alternative forms of organizing business activity, including cooperatives, fair trade, socialism, a variety of regulatory systems, etc. Each example offers opportunities to analyze and evaluate effectiveness and underlying values and the variety reinforces the role of individual and social choice in establishing norms.

10.3.5. World History A good liberal arts education is extensively historical, familiarizing students not only with major and global historical turning points and periods but also with arcs of change in politics, culture, and technology and with the inevitability and possibilities of change. History teaches liberal arts students to raise questions about cause and effect writ large and to grapple with its complexities. For any signiﬁcant historical event there are multiple causal explanations; moreover, the periodization of history leads to competing interpretations of which events are signiﬁcant at all (Gaddis, 2002; Veyne, 1984). In considering the importance, for managers, of studying history, Nelson (1958) maintained that a ‘‘perspective of time and history (is) one of the best safeguards

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

205

against rash and ill considered public action, (but) hardly can be acquired except by reading and reﬂection’’ (p. 281). Undergraduate business students know many things that the average student at an elite liberal arts college does not. But there are worrisome gaps in their knowledge of world history (Behrman & Levin, 1984). Here is a list of some of the more notable historical markers my students cannot provide the most basic description of:

The ﬁnancial failure of 2008 The New Deal Middle East politics The Cold War The Great Society Feudalism

General familiarity with these parts of world history is not simply a matter of an intellectual inventory or cultural pedigree. It is certainly possible to act with integrity in business without any of this knowledge. But today’s business environment, with its crisscrossing of global economies, culture, and politics, increasingly demands awareness of historical context and, just as importantly, appreciation of the powerful role of seemingly minor events and movements. Putting business activities in historical context also directly highlights the role of value judgments: the rights and responsibilities of the U.S. employees and employers can be more clearly evaluated as moral claims in the context of the development of American industry. The possibilities of trade relations with China can only be fully considered in light of the history of Chinese Communism and the Cold War. In part, management students’ lack of historical knowledge has nothing to do with their undergraduate education. It is a function of the pervasive social hierarchies described earlier. Students from non-elite families and school districts are less likely to have received this kind of education in their high schools than the more privileged students who attend liberal arts schools. But this difference is compounded by the instrumental focus of business programs. On the one hand, historical knowledge is not seen as serving an immediate business function. On the other hand, the abundance of techniques deemed necessary to learn ﬁlls up a curriculum, leaving little room for nonbusiness courses, including history. Weaving history into business courses is relatively straightforward. Treating topics, such as work, from the ground up calls for readings that speak to the qualities of work which have endured — and changed — across time. So, for example, De Tocqueville’s (1988) Democracy in America provides a basis for considering the truism that ‘‘all work is honorable.’’ Readings that describe the heyday (and relative demise) of the American labor movement shape discussion of how the conditions of paid work have changed and what issues persist. Excerpts of accounts of the Progressive Movement (e.g., Goodwyn, 1978; Zinn, 1995) can be used as the basis of classroom skits and discussion of corporate inﬂuence in government today. Historical complexities can also be suggested, in condensed form, with video clips and ﬁlms. News footage of The Great Leap Forward or of the sole demonstrator

206

Sarah Stookey

confronting tanks in Tiananmen Square powerfully conveys a spirit which can be contextualized through lecture and readings. Clearly, in a management classroom it is only possible to provide a bare outline of historical events, especially if a wide range seems relevant. But given students’ lack of familiarity, even limited exposure can be signiﬁcant. If the historical component does not provide detail it does make the statement that ‘‘these past events (Tiananmen Square, the Six Day War, the New Deal, etc.) matter and there’s more to today’s concern (trade relations with China or the future of Social Security) than you might think.’’ The overall effect may simply be to complicate the process of forming opinions. That, combined with some greater measure of humility about apparent national or economic imperatives can promote integrity.

10.3.6. The Arts and Sciences Cultural awareness is the understanding of the products and process of artistic, scientiﬁc, political, and intellectual endeavors. Individuals’ cultural awareness shapes interpretation of social phenomena. When cultural awareness, broadly deﬁned, is conﬁned to the currently and immediately prevalent, conceptual algorithms are limited. According to the 19th century poet, Matthew Arnold, an education that focuses on culture expands and enriches the capacity to make sense of the world by making ‘‘the best that has been thought and known in the world current everywhere’’ (cited in Carr, 2009). A substantive liberal arts education, with its emphasis on the arts and sciences familiarizes students with a broad range of cultural endeavors (Carr, 2009). In contrast, an undergraduate management program offers students little required exposure to the arts and sciences. As a result, most management undergraduates have not:

debated existentialism, gender relations, or immigration patterns; discussed the implications of developments in physics; watched a Charlie Chaplin movie; studied the U.S. plantation system; dissected a Supreme Court case; read Mark Twain; studied an artist or novelist; and taken an anthropology course.

The lack of exposure to a broad range of intellectual endeavor reinforces greater anti-intellectualism among business students than among students in other academic disciplines (Elias, 2008). Of course, there is no direct connection between emphasis on the arts and sciences and a tendency to act with integrity. In fact, given the predominance of Ivy League B.A.s among the most powerful scoundrels of recent scandals, that credential could be considered damning, integrity-wise. But, as with history, education that emphasizes the value of the arts and sciences can encourage

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

207

consideration of more subtle and wide-ranging implications of action and social choices (Small, 2006). A seminar on the caste system of India is valuable not only for the greater understanding of that particular phenomenon but also for what it teaches about the structure of social systems, their consequences and the levers of change. It also introduces students to the practice of scholarship and the ways that it can create new knowledge. The Freshman Seminars now so prevalent at elite liberal arts colleges and universities are rooted in this principle that students’ appreciation of a discipline is enhanced by seeing in-depth focus and advanced scholarship in action early in their college education. In contrast, the few arts and sciences courses a management major takes are likely to be broad survey courses in which it is harder to convey the intriguing aspects of a subject, the lessons for advancing human interests and the possibilities for new interpretation. Finally, courses in the arts and literature expose students to direct expressions of others’ experience, introducing new places and ways of living and feeling. Novels, autobiographies, poetry, music, and dance express human needs and aspirations in unique ways, building understanding and empathy (Carr, 2009). The relevance of more broadly humanistic education as part of preparation for management has been long and widely acknowledged if not extensively implemented. In their acclaimed book, In Search of Excellence, Peters and Waterman ‘‘cited former investment banker Michael Thomas, who said that today’s MBAs ‘lack liberal arts literacy y need a broader vision, a sense of history and perspectives from literature and art’’’ (Mulligan, 1987). Elements of this aspect of a liberal arts education can be incorporated into a management course through the standard tools: readings, lectures, classroom activities, and assignments. Again, it is largely a matter of widening the frame around a particular topic of more immediate management or business concern. I have already referred to the ways authors not usually associated with management (i.e., Kuhn, Rousseau, De Tocqueville) can open up discussion for probing questions about what is right and possible. The possibilities are endless and even brief exposure can be effective. The excerpt from Tom Sawyer in which Tom discovers how to make a proﬁt while others whitewash the fence is very effective in a discussion of what constitutes work. The ﬁrst 10 min of Chaplin’s Modern Times illustrate the timelessness of a very familiar experience of managerial control. The wide-ranging implications of scientiﬁc and technological developments can be easily addressed using serious newspaper reports. A few paragraphs from the Koran and Buddhist texts provoke new considerations in a discussion of wealth and proﬁt. There can be no pretense that these short interactions provide substantial understanding of the works or topics. But they serve a vital role of afﬁrming the importance of considering the usually-not-considered and encouraging students to consider their personal experience in the light of both familiar and unfamiliar narratives. A ﬁnal note concerns music and songwriting, a form of cultural expression management students are very familiar with. As part of asserting the importance of culture and the arts for understanding society, it can be very useful to incorporate music in the classroom by playing songs whose lyrics speak to the topic of the

208

Sarah Stookey

moment. An instructor’s choices can be useful because they usually involve music unfamiliar to the students. But to afﬁrm art’s power of expression it is also important to have students make their own choices to share with the class. It is striking how many popular songs speak very directly to the ways business affects lives and society.

10.3.7. The Local/Global The concentric circles around the YOU in the diagram described earlier the extension of geographic interdependency from the most local to the global. Sensitivity to these interlocking relationships is crucial to acting with integrity and to success in management (Kelley & Worthley, 1981). To some degree, having a global mindset and being a more cosmopolitan ‘‘citizen of the world’’ is a distinguishing characteristic of privileged liberal arts students. High-power businesses consider such a ‘‘global mindset’’ a crucial quality (Levy, Beechler, Taylor, & Boyacigiller, 2007). Greater ability to process events unfolding in the streets of Egypt or changes in the European Union is an increasingly important asset. But the ability to discern and analyze what is happening on more local levels is also crucial (Levy et al., 2007). If people are to act with attention to the effects on others, both are necessary. In terms of familiarity with places and people outside the United States the difference between management students’ understanding and that of liberal arts students at elite colleges and universities is not as clear-cut as in other areas. Liberal arts students tend to have the class-based advantage of families that travel more extensively and are generally more knowledgeable and engaged with the rest of the world. They are also more likely to consume news media that is more internationally focused. On the contrary, management undergraduates’ typically less elite families are more likely to have emigrated recently to the United States, have more intimate connections outside the United States and be more familiar with non-mainstream culture. Understanding of and connections with the local community are an area in which non-elite management students’ may have advantages over their elite liberal arts counterparts. The ﬂip side of less engagement with international events may be more engagement with what is near. The concerns of a town, region, or even state may seem parochial and less worthy of attention in elite circles. In a management classroom the challenge is, on the one hand, to help students become accustomed to paying attention to and analyzing the relevance of global events. One relatively easy and effective way of doing this is to make discussion of global, national, and local current events a frequent and important part of classroom activities. It is not sufﬁcient to rely on televised news reports; the less-digested form of newspaper reporting is necessary. Many teachers ask students to keep up with current events and some assign reading a daily news source. Although The Wall Street Journal is frequently used for this purpose, I prefer The New York Times. The Times more broadly considers what is newsworthy (providing many opportunities to discuss Big Picture concerns) and covers international events more fully. Furthermore, as I tell my Connecticut students, it is paper of choice among the

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

209

powerful business people who take the train from Fairﬁeld County to Grand Central on weekday mornings. It is therefore more likely to be the paper elite students at liberal arts colleges found on their kitchen counters growing up. Facility with the range of topics and level of analysis that distinguishes The New York Times from U.S.A. Today, for example, is an important part of the stance that gives liberal arts students their greater self-conﬁdence and assumption of authority which management students tend to lack. Another very effective news source is The Economist magazine (I tell students this is what people are reading in the front of the plane going to London or Beijing). Finally, the Internet and predominance of English makes non-U.S. news sources readily accessible. Assigning students to read the online versions of The Lusaka Times or the English paper, The Guardian over the course of several weeks gives them insight into unfamiliar national and global perspectives. Because students often lack the background knowledge to make sense of what is reported, it is not enough to assign reading. It is important to also take time to discuss selected reports in depth on a regular basis. These discussions can become quite rich as students’ questions prompt discussion of contextual factors, historical precedence, and alternative interpretations. They can also be opportunities for students whose families originated in other parts of the world to contribute their special insights. As the events are discussed the circular YOU diagram can be used to chart the effects at different levels and the connections between events and places. Over the course of a semester, such discussions can substantially increase students’ abilities to think about global complexities. Although international news can be very compelling, also discussing local news counteracts a tendency to devalue the more familiar. Students can be encouraged to consider their home communities, and especially the business and economic dimensions, in new, more complex terms, adding analysis to description. Attention to the local also is not parochial; in any given region differences of class, ethnicity, urbanization, etc. mean much is unknown to students, even about the community next door. In addition to discussing local news, student research about ‘‘food deserts’’ state-wide or the characteristics of local housing markets can illuminate the needs and resources of unfamiliar neighbors. Direct interaction with people in the local community is the most powerful (and challenging to incorporate into coursework) way for students to gain new appreciation of differences locally and — by extension — situations facing people throughout the country. At elite liberal arts colleges where students tend to live and work (if they do) on campus, outreach programs are more common. Management majors at non-elite schools are more likely to live off-campus and to have jobs offcampus. The opportunities for volunteer work with community organizations are therefore more limited. The challenge then is to incorporate this kind of interaction into the course requirements and assigned course time. I have had very good results with having management students’ work with middle school students in a series of meetings to develop curricula and even business planning competitions. The younger students, I tell my students, are likely to be their future employees, employers, or neighbors — it is important that they get to know each other.

210

Sarah Stookey

Greater understanding of the signiﬁcance of conditions around the world and locally helps students to embrace and manage complex business and civic situations. Developing understanding of commonalities and differences across geographic, economic, and cultural distances helps them be more thoughtful about the impact of their choices and actions.

10.3.8. Claiming Powerful Voices Integrity requires consideration of others. But making that consideration real also requires the sense that self-efﬁcacy is possible. The ‘‘YOU’’ diagram asserts the importance of individual experience, values, choices, and actions and the importance of being engaged and thoughtful. One of the most signiﬁcant aspects of an elite liberal arts education often missing from undergraduate management education is cultivation of individual voice. History, the arts and sciences, and current events all highlight the potential of individual and small group actions. Social hierarchies, reﬂected in the educational system, undermine many non-elite students’ self-conﬁdence at the same time that they elevate the conﬁdence of elite liberal arts students. This difference is particularly striking, in light of differences in life experience of the two groups. For example, in a seminar of juniors and seniors at an elite liberal arts college, only a couple of students had ever held a paying job. Very few of them had any idea how business worked (i.e., the difference between a private and a public company), even though many of their parents played inﬂuential roles in business. On the contrary, virtually all of my management students have been doing serious paid work since they were young teenagers. When I have told them about peers who did not have jobs as teenagers they have been dumbfounded — ‘‘How did they buy anything?’’ they asked. Not only have my management students put in countless hours as waitresses, landscapers, clerks, secretaries, and tellers. They have also managed work crews, helped run family businesses and started their own, paid medical bills, received unemployment, been on food stamps, earned their tuition and saved up for a down payment on a house. These management students are capable and responsible. And, in terms of personal experience they are eminently more qualiﬁed in business than their liberal arts counterparts. Certainly they have a more vivid sense of the short end of the stick. Yet they have received the message that their experience and voices are not valuable. If integrity derives from the sense of being an important part of a large and complex whole and having responsibility to a wide range of others, then they have been limited. The management classroom can be a place for encouraging students to value their own experience at the same time that they are urged to consider the unfamiliar (Roca, 2007). An elementary practice is to insist that they write analytical essays in the ﬁrst-person, particularly for claiming and taking responsibilities not only for opinions but also for reliance on particular assumptions. Invariably, at the beginning of a semester, when students hand in their ﬁrst essays, their aversion to using ‘‘I’’ to claim opinions becomes evident. When I call their attention to this they remind me

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

211

that they have always been taught not to use the ﬁrst-person. Recently, when I asked one class why they thought their teachers had taught that a young woman said, ‘‘They don’t want to hear what we think.’’ That impression, conﬁrmed by others, is important to discuss. Other techniques include having them write letters to the editors of local or national newspapers or to elected representatives. In addition to claiming their voice in writing, I expect students to articulate opinions and develop arguments, in generalized discussions, small group work and debates. One of the goals of discussion about everything from philosophy to current events is to reduce the barriers to engaging. It is critical to avoid making students feel their opinions are wrong or that they are ill-informed. As professor and participant in the discussions I try to make clear that while my own knowledge about most topics is limited I believe in my right and responsibility to try to ﬁgure things out. Of course, it is also important that I frame opinions as possibilities: ‘‘if you believe this, then y,’’ and not make my own preferences explicit. I tell students outright that I do not care whether or not they agree with what they think are my opinions or with the views of any author, only that they work on ﬁguring out and sharing their own views. The critical message is that their voices are worth attending to, sometimes even more so than the experts’.

10.4. Conclusions The failures of business to advance broad social interests are not, largely, due to decision makers’ lack of personal integrity. Managers work in a political economy which equates short-term results, ﬁnancial proﬁt and personal gain with success and treats workers, consumers, and the natural environment as instruments. But organizations and societies are maintained by people acting individually and in groups. Education contributes to shaping individuals’ sense of business and social imperatives and the possibility of acting differently. The educational system in the United States mirrors a society segregated by elitism and governed by hierarchies of privilege. These values cannot ever promote integrity. If business is to serve other than short-term and minority elite interests we need a different educational system. All students, regardless of their social and economic status, need opportunities to understand how business works/can work from many different perspectives. And all students, regardless of their social and economic status, need to be exposed to the powerful ideas and traditions of the liberal arts. Management undergraduates bring to the classroom rich understanding of how business works. Yet management education too often consists of imposing an overlay of instrumental and often socially dysfunctional values and prescriptions. Therefore afﬁrming the importance of individual voice and the capability of each person to formulate critique and alternatives may be the most important contribution of a liberal arts approach to management education. This self-conﬁdent and socially aware stance is a prerequisite for integrity. Incorporating the elements of a liberal arts education outlined here in an undergraduate management classroom is a challenge. The norms of doctoral

212

Sarah Stookey

preparation and the AACSB are substantial obstacles to teaching which challenges the status quo, introduces new frameworks and resists focusing future employees and managers — our current students — into instruments for achieving ﬁnancial goals (Giacalone & Thompson, 2006; Swanson, 2004).Yet management education is also uniquely positioned for making change. Beyond the obvious (our business is business) management undergraduates bring to the classroom personal experiences and an understanding of the power of business usually lacking in elite liberal arts classrooms. This experience, so signiﬁcantly ignored by managerial instrumentalism, should be a central concern in evaluating business norms and practices. Supplemented by elements of a liberal arts approach management undergraduates can be extremely effective agents of change. Expanding this approach to promoting integrity institutionally involves moving beyond the management classroom to seek opportunities for deepening and systematizing a liberal arts orientation across business school departments. The same elements of Big Picture thinking, assumptions, social construction, world history, arts and sciences global/local, and individual voice can be enlisted to encourage cross-disciplinary courses, especially on topics of global and local social and economic interest, for example, housing, water, food, healthcare, etc. These kinds of topics offer rich opportunities to consider opportunities for proﬁt-making but also many forms of interdependencies. Similarly, cross-disciplinary research can open up new avenues of thinking and investigation for faculty. On a university level collaboration with faculty in other schools can be a particularly fruitful way to integrate business and traditional areas of liberal arts study (Kanter, 1994). On my campus the Honors College offers opportunities to for cross-disciplinary teaching but traditionally business faculty have not pursued these. Co-teaching a recent course, ‘‘Business and Government,’’ with a colleague in the political science department helped me to see my own subject matter and ways of teaching in new and useful lights. The students, all liberal arts majors, had very little understanding of even the most basic aspects of business and enjoyed becoming familiar with institutions and systems they had largely ignored. Unfortunately (and I think it is a reﬂection of the dynamics described earlier), few business students enroll in the Honors College. Besides addressing that lack, we need to ﬁgure out ways that all students can take such co-taught, interdisciplinary courses. At the very least we can invite our colleagues from across the campus to guest lecture. Finally, we can promote cross-campus projects that give students opportunities to work with the community (locally and globally) to address problems and create ways of acting with greater integrity. The AASCU Democracy Project and Civic Agency initiative are national efforts that help to strategize about how to do this. There are many ways management educators can incorporate a liberal arts approach into our teaching and profession in order to encourage integrity in business. But given the social and economic segregation that permeates our educational system, it is also crucial that elite liberal arts schools incorporate more education about business into their curricula. This is not a matter of inviting exalted business leader alumnae to speak on campus. It is not accomplished by most economics courses. It requires more consideration of the normative assumptions of

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

213

business, of the mechanisms of its operation, the magnitude and pervasiveness of its often-contradictory effects on people. As suggested by the recommendations made here for the management classroom, it requires enlarging and deepening the scope of students’ perspective and their sensitivity to the experience of people who are unfamiliar yet surely linked. Educators at colleges and universities of all sorts need to be enlisted to prepare students to create business organizations and systems that act with integrity. We need to prepare young people across the range of schools and social background to analyze critically and envision ways of doing business that advance satisfying livelihoods, gratifying and sustainable consumption and vibrant and diverse communities. Weaving together the liberal arts and business offers one way education can address the injustices that segregate and keep us from acting with care.

References Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage Publications. Baudrillard, J. (1995). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Behrman, J. I., & Levin, R. I. (1984). Are business schools doing their job? Harvard Business Review, 62(2), 140–147. Birnik, A., & Billsberry, J. (2008). Reorienting the business school agenda: The case for relevance, rigor, and righteousness. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 985–999. Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In: A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 19–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burke, C. B. (1983). American collegiate populations: A test of the traditional view. New York: New York University Press. Carr, D. (2009). Revisiting the liberal and vocational dimensions of university education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 57(1), 1–17. De Tocqueville, A. (1988). Democracy in America (Original work published 1835). New York: Perennial Library. Elias, R. Z. (2008). Anti-intellectual attitudes and academic self-efﬁcacy among business students. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 110–117. Finn, C. E. Jr., & Ravitch, D. (2007, August 8). Not by geeks alone. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p. A.13. Retrieved July 6, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1316534321). Gaddis, J. L. (2002, November–December). A grand strategy of transformation. Foreign Policy No. 133 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC (pp. 50–57). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3183557 Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, K. R. (2006). Business ethics and social responsibility education: Shifting the worldview. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 53, 266–280. Goldhagen, D. (1996). Hitler’s willing executioners. New York: Vintage. Goodwyn, L. (1978). The populist moment: A short history of the agrarian revolt in America. New York: Oxford University Press. Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E. (1959). Higher education for business. New York: Columbia University Press.

214

Sarah Stookey

Green, K. C. (1992). After the boom: Management majors in the 1990s. New York: McGrawHill. Hall, E. (1959). The silent language. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Publication. Hall, P. D. (1982). The organization of American culture: Private institutions, elites and the origins of American nationality. New York: New York University Press. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reﬂection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206. Huehn, M. P. (2008). Unenlightened economism: The antecedents of bad corporate governance and ethical decline. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 823–835. Kanter, R. M. (1994). Collaborative advantage: The art of alliances. Harvard Business Review, 4, 96–108. Kelley, L., & Worthley, R. (1981). The role of culture in comparative management: Acrosscultural perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 24(1), 164–173. Kershaw, I. (2000). The Nazi dictatorship: Problems and perspectives of interpretation. London: Arnold. Key, S. (1996). Economics or education: The establishment of American land-grant universities. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 196–220. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientiﬁc revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kushner, R. J. (1999). Curriculum as strategy: The scope and organization of business education in liberal arts colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 70(4), 413–440. Leppel, K. (2001). Race, Hispanic ethnicity, and the future of the college business major in the United States. Journal of Education for Business, 76(4), 209–216. Levy, O., Beechler, S., Taylor, S., & Boyacigiller, N. A. (2007). What we talk about when we talk about ‘‘global mindset’’: Managerial cognition in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 231–258. McKeon, R. (1968). Character and the arts and disciplines. Ethics, 78(2), 109–123. Mulligan, T. M. (1987). The two cultures in business education. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 593–599. Nelson, C. A. (1958). Liberal education for public service? Public Administration Review, 18(4), 278–284. Pace, C. R., & Connolly, M. (2000). Where are the liberal arts? Research in Higher Education, 41(1), 53–65. Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 78–95. Pierson, F. C. (1959). The education of American businessmen. New York: McGraw Hill. Rimer, S. (2008). Big paycheck or service? Students are put to the test. New York Times, June 23. Roca, E. (2007). Introducing practical wisdom in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 607–620. Rossett, R. N. (undated). Business education in the United States. Selected Paper #59.University of Chicago, Booth School of Business. Retrieved from http://www. chicagobooth.edu/faculty/selectedpapers/sp59.pdf. Roth, M. (2008, December 1). What’s a liberal arts education good for? (Web log essay). Retrieved from http://www.hufﬁngtonpost.com/michael-roth/whats-a-liberal-arts-educ_b_147584.html. Salem, R., & Grabarek, S. (1986). Sociology B.A.s in a corporate setting: How can they get there and of what value are they? Teaching Sociology. 14(4), 273–275. Senge, P. (1990). The ﬁfth discipline: The art and practice of a learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

Education for Integrity: Business, Elitism, and the Liberal Arts

215

Small, M. W. (2006). A case for including business ethics and humanities in management programs. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 195–211. Swanson, D. L. (2004). The buck stops here: Why universities must reclaim business ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(1), 43–61. Tsui, A. (2008). Cultivating critical thinking: Insights from an elite liberal arts college. Journal of General Education, 56(3–4), 200–227. Veyne, P. (1984). Writing history: Essay on epistemology. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. Wright, F. W. (1930). The evolution of the normal schools. Elementary School Journal, 30(5), 363–371. Zinn, H. (1995). A people’s history of the United States. New York: Harper Perennial.

Chapter 11

Meeting the Objectives of Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model and Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience Bradley R. Agle, Jeffery A. Thompson, David W. Hart, Lori L. Wadsworth and Aaron Miller

Abstract Purpose –– Business ethics education is critical in the development of leaders in management who possess integrity. In this chapter, we introduce the Marriott School Model to business ethics education. In so doing, we assert that any successful pedagogical approach to developing ethical leaders must progress through at least four primary levels of business ethics education. Those four primary levels that should be covered in the classroom are: (1) personal ethical understanding, (2) application of ethical principles to business situations, (3) moral courage and organizational savvy, and (4) ethical leadership. Methodology –– This chapter is a conceptual piece based on the authors’ collective experiences, as well as a literature review of pedagogical applications. Findings –– The future of business ethics education holds great promise. We assert that with the use of stand-alone dedicated business ethics courses, ethics applications utilized throughout the entire management curricula, as well as various ﬁeld experiences that address lessons in business ethics, can be even better at producing greater levels of integrity in business settings. Originality –– This chapter is the ﬁrst extensive discussion of the Marriott School Model of business ethics education.

Management Education for Integrity: Ethically Educating Tomorrow’s Business Leaders Copyright r 2011 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISBN: 978-1-78052-068-1

218

Bradley R. Agle et al.

11.1. Introduction There is an extensive literature on the teaching of business ethics and integrity during the past 30 years. This literature deals with various questions such as: what are the objectives of such teaching, what pedagogies can be used, how effective are such pedagogies, how can ethics be integrated into other nonethics courses, how effective is such integration, how can an organization model effect ethical behavior, what things shouldn’t be taught in our business schools in order to promote ethics, etc. In this chapter, we take a holistic or broad-based approach to the development of strong moral principles and integrity in business schools. We begin by examining the various objectives of business ethics education. We do this through an examination of the ethics development model used in the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. We then provide examples of the various types of pedagogical approaches discussed in the business ethics literature for each of these objectives, along with examples of successful pedagogical techniques used in Marriott School ethics courses. We conclude by discussing the Marriott School agenda for fuller fulﬁllment of its ethics mission. Such an agenda includes utilizing all the elements of a student’s collegiate experience to enhance their ethical development, per the ethics development model. Albrecht, Hill, and Albrecht (2006) originally created the ethics development model for the Marriott School of Management. The model shown in Figure 11.1 and shaped like a pyramid is a slightly modiﬁed version of this model, with organizational savvy added to the level of moral courage. This model is a developmental model in which each higher level builds upon the previous level. The foundation of the model is an individual’s ethical understanding. Students do not come to business schools as empty slates. They have already developed certain ethical understandings through their lives. We attempt to help them develop a

Ethical Leadership

Ethical Courage & Organizational Savvy

Application of Ethics to Business Situations

Personal Ethical Understanding

Figure 11.1: Marriott school ethics development model. Source: Adapted from Albrecht et al. (2006).

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

219

stronger understanding of their own ethical values and to strengthen their commitment to, and understanding of, ethical principles. The second level of the model involves the student learning to apply the ethical principles from level one in actual business situations. Such practice in application can be very helpful to students as they begin to deal with real ethical dilemmas early in their career. The third level of the model involves moral courage and organizational savvy. This level emphasizes the need not only for an understanding of what should be done in ethical dilemmas but also the need for the personal fortitude and skills necessary to do the right thing in difﬁcult circumstances. Finally, the top level of the model focuses on ethical leadership, the ability to inﬂuence others for good.

11.2. Level One: Personal Ethical Understanding Teaching business ethics relies on an understanding of basic ethical values. Almost all students bring these values with them into a business ethics course. The ﬁrst level of the Marriott School Model reinforces these values and helps students better understand them. We do this by pursuing four objectives (Table 11.1):

Identifying and enhancing personal values and virtues Increasing ethical sensitivity Knowing the beneﬁts of ethical behavior Developing awareness of inﬂuences on ethical behavior.

11.2.1. Identifying and Enhancing Personal Values and Virtues Various pedagogical approaches discussed in the literature describe ways to reinforce students’ understanding of basic ethical values. Relying on ethical problems depicted in ﬁction is an effective way to press students to better understand their own ethics. By having students project their decisions in difﬁcult ethical problems, they often realize the strengths and weaknesses of their own ethical understanding. Common ﬁctional approaches include the use of movies, modern morality plays (Alsop, 2006), literature, and role-playing. Some movies and plays have been speciﬁcally mentioned, including Death of a Salesman (Garaventa, 1998), The Insider (Van Es, 2003), and Ibsen’s An Enemy to the People (Brinkmann, 2009). In the Marriott School, we often use the ﬁlm Miss Evers’ Boys, which is a ﬁctional depiction of the Tuskegee Study of syphilitic black men, focusing on the role played by the head nurse in the study. Class discussion about the ﬁlm focuses on what ethical values the nurse should have applied to her decisions and how those compare to the values the students hold. Most importantly, whenever movies, plays, literature, or role-playing are used to teach ethics, instructors should push students to articulate how their ethics would lead them to act in such a situation.

220

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Table 11.1: Level 1 — Individual ethical understanding. Objectives of level 1

Pedagogy

Author(s)

Identifying and enhancing personal values and virtues

Case studies Movies

Many references Giacalone and Jurkiewicz (2001), Van Es (2003) Alsop (2006), Garaventa (1998), Brinkmann (2009) Adams et al. (1998), Sanyal (2000), LeClair, Ferrell, Montuori, and Willems (1999) Adams et al. (1998) Jones and Ottaway (2001)

Plays Role-playing

Increasing ethical sensitivity Knowing the beneﬁts of ethical behavior Developing awareness of inﬂuences on ethical behavior

Literature Personal codes of ethics Case studies Student written cases Prison ﬁeld trips Enron case Milgram experiment

Many references Dunfee and Robertson (1988) Castleberry (2007) Wipperfurth (2002) Sheppard and Young (2007)

Although almost every student has a commitment to ethics in general, students frequently fail to understand their own individual ethics and values in detail. For this reason, self-assessment activities can also be effective teaching tools. The research demonstrates a wide variety of effective self-assessment activities to help students better understand their ethics. In Marriott School ethics courses, the personal code of ethics assignment, also recommended by Jones and Ottaway (2001), asks students to articulate their personal ethics in a way that guides their decision-making. Students complete three drafts of the personal code of ethics throughout the semester, and the instructors give detailed feedback helping the students improve each draft. The assignment usually helps students better understand their own ethics. For example, students often sense the need to fulﬁll the obligations they owe to their employers, families, and communities, without understanding exactly what those obligations are and how they relate to each other. We ﬁnd that students sometimes express these obligations without thoughtful wording, writing statements like, ‘‘I’ll always put my family ﬁrst.’’ Although admirable in principle, it is a broad, inaccurate statement about the obligation a student might owe to his family. We give feedback helping the students recognize the need to better articulate — and thus better understand — the obligations they hold. By the ﬁnal draft, students instead express their obligations with greater clarity and purpose, such as, ‘‘I commit to providing

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

221

for my family’s physical, emotional, and spiritual welfare.’’ Each semester produces similar examples of improved understanding involving values like honesty, justice, and care for others. These improvements give students clarity in the kinds of decisions they aspire to make.

11.2.2. Increasing Ethical Sensitivity Understanding ethical virtues like honesty or care does not mean students will automatically recognize ethical problems when they arise. As such, students may fail to recognize situations that present ethical danger. Therefore, presenting students with situations that are not obviously ethically dangerous helps them to learn to develop better ethical sensitivity. Case studies, a staple of business education, work well for developing ethical sensitivity. In our experience, a case involving potential conﬂicts of interests often surprises students because the conﬂict arises from something common in business like an offer to buy someone an expensive lunch. Students simply see this as ‘‘how business gets done’’ rather than as a potential conﬂict of interest. Outside of the traditional, in-class model of case teaching, cases can be used in other creative ways. Students can write their own cases, researching a situation faced by someone they know personally (Dunfee & Robertson, 1988). This is an approach we use in the Marriott School. We ﬁnd that students write teaching notes that push the students to be more attentive to their own ethical values. Also, students who write cases may ﬁnd that if they present them to their classmates, their conclusions could be challenged by the other students, further reﬁning their ethical sensitivity. By default, business ethics faculty turn to cases describing business circumstances, but this is not necessary for reinforcing personal ethical values. Any situation evoking an ethical dilemma, like a conﬂict with a neighbor or an encounter with a charity fundraiser, can help students better understand their own ethics. In fact, sometimes these situations are more probing because they help students realize that ethics reaches into every aspect of life.

11.2.3. Knowing the Beneﬁts of Ethical Behavior Ethical choices often have immediate or remote beneﬁts that students may not appreciate. These beneﬁts might be economic, social, or psychological. Understanding the beneﬁts of ethical behavior helps students to increasingly see an ethical choice as a good choice. Castleberry (2007) writes about the effectiveness of taking students to meet with white-collar criminals through prison ﬁeld trips. The Enron case is common in ethics courses (Wipperfurth, 2002). Part of its effectiveness lies in the consequences that came from the choices made by Enron executives, a potent warning to students.

222

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Besides avoiding negative outcomes for unethical choices, it is important to reinforce the good outcomes that would realize from ethical choices. In this area, the research in effective pedagogy is not as well developed. More could be done in this area to help students appreciate the positive outcomes of ethical choices. In the Marriott School, we use the Prisoner’s Dilemma in class, altering it in a way that illustrates beneﬁts to ethical behavior. The activity involves a ten-round iterated version of the game played in pairs and using a typical scoring mechanism (e.g., three points to each for cooperation, ﬁve points to an aggressor and zero points to a cooperator, and one point to each if both are aggressors). After the students choose their opponents, the instructor divides the class into three groups: A’s and B’s, C’s and D’s, and E’s and F’s. Each letter group receives secret instructions for playing the game. D’s, E’s, and F’s are simply told to try and get the highest score they can. A’s, B’s, and C’s are told to get the highest score possible, but at the end of the game their opponents will rate how satisﬁed they are with their outcome on a scale of one to ten, ten being the highest. A’s, B’s, and C’s are then told that the number chosen by their opponents will be added to their own ﬁnal score. This addition incentivizes students to care about their opponents’ satisfaction, approximating ethics within the conﬁnes of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Table 11.2 illustrates the arrangement of players and instructions. Students are also told that they can only negotiate with their opponent during the rounds when we allow it, usually before rounds two, four, seven, and ten. After the ten rounds are played, all of the students rate their satisfaction with their own outcome. Each letter group then gathers together and calculates an average of their raw score, without any bonus points added for opponent’s satisfaction, and the average satisfaction score for the group. Although outliers can skew the results in small classes, the AB pairings typically perform the best in raw score and in satisfaction score because their ‘‘ethical’’ incentive encourages cooperation and thus increased potential value. Also, the ‘‘ethical’’ C’s usually do as well as D’s, E’s, and F’s, even though they are incentivized to care about D’s satisfaction when D has no reason to care about C’s satisfaction. This activity drives home the lesson that ethical values in competitive situations can lead to increasing value through cooperation. We end the discussion with real-world examples of how bad ethics can lead to high transaction costs for negotiating parties.

11.2.4. Developing Awareness of Inﬂuences on Ethical Behavior However, even with a clear understanding of ethical values and a commitment to follow them, outside inﬂuences often lead to unethical decisions. Cognitive, social, and psychological factors often divert well-intended decision-makers. Learning about these inﬂuences helps students better compensate for them in their ethical choices. Although a great deal of research relates to outside inﬂuences on ethical behavior, very little research relates to effectively teaching business ethics students about these inﬂuences. The Milgram obedience study is a very common teaching tool about

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

223

Table 11.2: Prisoner’s dilemma game. Pairing

Player

Pairing 1 Player A

Instructions

Try to obtain the highest score possible. At the end of the game, your opponent will be asked to rate his or her satisfaction with the outcome on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 ¼ highest). Their satisfaction will be added to your score. Player B Try to obtain the highest score possible. At the end of the game, your opponent will be asked to rate his or her satisfaction with the outcome on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 ¼ highest). Their satisfaction will be added to your score. Pairing 2 Player C Try to obtain the highest score possible. At the end of the game, your opponent will be asked to rate his or her satisfaction with the outcome on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 ¼ highest). Their satisfaction will be added to your score. Player D Try to obtain the highest score possible. Pairing 3 Player E Try to obtain the highest score possible. Player F

Typical outcome High raw score High satisfaction score

High raw score High satisfaction score

Moderate raw score High satisfaction score

Moderate raw score Moderate satisfaction score Moderate to low raw score Moderate to low satisfaction score Try to obtain the highest score Moderate to low raw score possible. Moderate to low satisfaction score

outside inﬂuences that works well (Sheppard & Young, 2007). Beyond this, the literature says little on teaching students to understand these inﬂuences. We use an engaging in-class activity that asks the students prior to class to complete a survey evoking common cognitive errors, like the availability heuristic,

224

Bradley R. Agle et al.

the framing effect, loss aversion, and overconﬁdence. We divide the students into two different groups to better illustrate the effects. For example, one group took a survey that asked students to weigh a layoff plan that will lose 400 of 600 jobs while the other group took a survey that describes the same plan as saving 200 of 600 jobs. True to the framing effect and loss aversion, students who faced losing jobs usually avoided the layoff plan while students saving jobs typically preferred it. After learning the survey results in class, which almost always illustrate the cognitive biases, the discussion centers on how these biases might affect ethical decisionmaking. We then give the students multiple examples of these effects on ethics.

11.3. Level Two: Application of Ethical Principles to Business Situations The second level of the model involves the application of ethical concepts to the professional context. Students may have a ﬁrm foundation in the ﬁrst level of the model (i.e., the development of strong moral principles and integrity) and yet still fail to recognize context-speciﬁc ethical dilemmas or to apply their personal principles into the managerial context. Consequently, it is vital that ethics education provide opportunities for students to grapple with dilemmas common in the business environment, and to master theories and frameworks that allow them to reason about ethics in a professional context. We have identiﬁed three general objectives pertinent to developing students’ capacity at this level. Table 11.3 provides a listing of techniques identiﬁed by pedagogical research that support these objectives. We describe each of these three objectives, and provide a brief discussion of the elements of an ethics curriculum that would support each of them.

11.3.1. Understand Ethical Issues in the Business Environment In order to prepare students to act ethically in the business environment, an effective business ethics curriculum must introduce them to the types of dilemmas that commonly confront managers. This is particularly important for undergraduates who may have little to no managerial experience, but even students with signiﬁcant work experience may have overlooked ethical dimensions of the decisions they made at work. Courses that focus purely on character development or theoretical perspectives may leave students ill-equipped to identify ethical aspects of the critical decisions they make. A compelling example of someone with high integrity who nonetheless failed to perceive the ethical dimension of a critical business decision is the experience of Dennis Gioia in the Pinto Fires case (see Gioia, 1992, as well as the video case produced by Pennsylvania State University), which we ﬁnd to be an extremely effective learning tool in our courses. Pedagogical research provides considerable guidance about techniques for fostering understanding of ethical issues in the business context. Naturally, the most common approach to immersing students into practical issues is through the

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

225

Table 11.3: Level 2 — Application of ethics to business situations. Objectives of Level 2

Pedagogy

Author(s)

Understand ethical issues in the business environment

Case studies Business simulations

Many references Beggs et al. (2006), Gowen, Hanna, Jacobs, Keys, and Weiss (1996); Kavathatzopoulos, 2003 Bishop (1992), Carroll and Buchholtz (2011), Christensen et al. (2007) Desjardins and Diedrich (2003), Dunfee and Robertson (1988) Many references Beggs et al. (2006), Castleberry (2007), Henle (2006) Many references Adams et al. (1998), Alsop (2006), Brinkmann (2009), Cohen and Gotlieb (1989), Raisner (1997) Christensen et al. (2007), Jones and Ottaway (2001) Couger (1989)

Early-career dilemma examples Student-written cases

Role-playing Guest lectures Using current news stories Using ﬁction and media

Excursions

Learn ethical theories and apply them in the business context Develop a commitment to ethical professional behavior

Study companies’ ethics programs Read ethics literature and use cases

Adopting an honor code at the business school level Student orientation ethics emphasis Student-generated codes of conduct

Many references

Trevino and McCabe (1994) Christensen et al. (2007), Hawley (1991) Buff and Yonkers (2005), Jones and Ottaway (2001), Kidwell (2001)

case study method. Our literature review revealed many articles that examine the use of (and advocate for) case studies in business ethics education. As per Table 11.3, some speciﬁc unique strategies for incorporating case studies include the use of computer-based cases (Beggs, Dean, Gillespie, & Weiner, 2006), ‘‘living cases’’ in

226

Bradley R. Agle et al.

partnership with practitioners (Christensen, Peirce, Hartman, Hoffman, & Carrier, 2007), and real-world scenarios that students are likely to encounter in their careers (Bishop, 1992; Carroll & Buchholtz, 2011). Some scholars advocate using studentwritten cases as a course assignment (Desjardins & Diedrich, 2003; Dunfee & Robertson, 1988). Role-plays are another common technique for introducing students to ethical issues in business. Scholars have also explored the beneﬁts of inviting guest speakers to class, whether they be managers (Beggs et al., 2006), religious leaders (Henle, 2006), or white-collar criminals who can provide cautionary tales (Castleberry, 2007). Other techniques suggested in the literature include immersion in media related to business ethics, both ﬁctional and factual (Adams, Harris, & Carley, 1998; Alsop, 2006; Cohen & Gotlieb, 1989) or conducting excursions to immerse students in the business environment (Christensen et al., 2007). A novel technique that we have found useful for increasing awareness of ethical issues in the business context is the ‘‘Impromptu Dilemma,’’ an experience that draws students into extemporaneous decision-making. To conduct this exercise, we have a teaching assistant email a micro-case to all students in the class. An example is as follows: Your supervisor has alerted you that your department will be closed in two months and your employees will be laid off. You, however, will receive a promotion. You promise your supervisor that you will keep this information strictly conﬁdential until the HR department is prepared to conduct the layoffs legally. One of your employees, an excellent performer and a personal friend, has just approached you and asked, ‘‘What can you tell me about these rumors about layoffs? I’m getting ready to close on a new house in two days. I really need to know if I’m still going to have a job.’’ You have no time to think. Write your response to this employee now. Students are required to send an immediate brief response (no more than a sentence or two) back to the TA, who records participation, removes identifying information from each response, and then compiles the responses for the professor. We then use these anonymous responses to foster a discussion in class about appropriate actions and ethical issues. We have found this exercise to be an extremely effective way to point out errors in ethical reasoning without putting particular students on the spot. Feedback from students indicate that these exercises create heightened awareness of ethical issues and cause students to think more critically — and often change their minds — about what constitutes ethical behavior at work. 11.3.2. Learn Ethical Theories and Apply them in the Business Context Although we are skeptical about ethics curricula that deliver only theoretical perspectives, we strongly advocate the incorporation of ethical theory into the curriculum. Many teachers shy away from discussing moral theory in the classroom, either because they do not feel they have adequate philosophical training, or because

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

227

they believe that students will not be receptive to it. Some faculty themselves do not see the value of moral philosophy in business ethics. In our collective experience, however, we have discovered that students are highly receptive to moral theory when we frame it as a set of tools that allow them to think more carefully about business issues, and to argue their positions more persuasively. This ‘‘strategic’’ use of moral theory resonates within the culture of business education, and yet produces the happy side effect of better thinking among students. In our review of the pedagogical literature on business ethics training, we have been surprised at the lack of research dedicated to understanding how to deliver training on moral theory in business ethics courses. This represents a serious gap in the literature, and suggests an important opportunity for scholarly contributions. In our experience, one tool that has proven very useful and effective in helping our students apply ethical theory in the business context is an ‘‘Ethics Toolkit’’ (see Table 11.4). The toolkit provides a very general description of ﬁve major theories that we employ in the classroom. For each theory, we provide criteria that constitute ethical behavior, questions for personal reﬂection, limitations, and ‘‘discussion starters’’ (ways to invoke the theoretical perspective using regular business language). The last column, in particular, proves to be popular with students, and we often have them practice ethical dialogue using the types of statements and questions provided by the toolkit. We welcome other faculty to employ and adapt the toolkit in their own teaching.

11.3.3. Develop a Commitment to Ethical Professional Behavior The capability to identify ethical issues in the business context and reason about them using ethical frameworks does little practical good for students if they do not also have a strong resolve to act ethically within the professional context. For that reason, a third key objective at the second level of our model is the development of a commitment to ethical professional behavior. A good business ethics course will include elements that foster a sense of personal obligation to the highest standards of professional integrity. Pedagogical research on fostering a commitment to ethical professional behavior is quite scarce. In terms of in-class activities that directly address fostering a commitment to ethical behavior in the business context, several scholars (Buff & Yonkers, 2005; Jones & Ottaway, 2001; Kidwell, 2001) explore the use of studentgenerated codes of conduct as a teaching tool, and Couger (1989) examined the effects of having Information Systems (IS) students study company’s ethics programs as an indoctrination into standards of the IS profession. Scholars have also attended to activities and inﬂuences that happen outside the conﬁnes of the traditional classroom in fostering commitment to professional behavior. For instance, Christensen et al. (2007) and Hawley (1991) have explored the role of an ethics emphasis during student orientations, and Trevino and McCabe (1994) examined the impact of operating a business school under an honor code.

Utilitarianism

Deontology

What are the core principles at stake?

Questions I should ask myself

Will this decision be fair to all involved?

Who will be affected by my decision? Who will beneﬁt, and who will be harmed?

Beneﬁts and costs are equitably distributed

It provides the greatest beneﬁt to the most people

Discussion starters (in ‘‘business-speak’’)

Difﬁcult to anticipate how others really feel Difﬁcult to measure costs ‘‘Will any of our and beneﬁts stakeholders feel this Lack of agreement on decision is unfair to fair shares them?’’ Difﬁcult to measure costs ‘‘Let’s talk about who and beneﬁts our decision will impact the most. Who are the key stakeholders here?’’

‘‘Are we treating our stakeholders as we would like to be treated?’’

‘‘Would we be content if others (competitors, employees, partners) did what we plan to do?’’ Difﬁcult to balance ‘‘Will our decision make conﬂicting rights some people feel that Lack of agreement about they are just being rights used?’’

Difﬁcult to manage competing principles Difﬁcult to bound the conditions

Limitations

It treats other people as Am I protecting others’ ends in themselves, and rights? Does my not just as a means decision preserve others’ dignity and agency? It is reversible (as per the Would I be willing to be Multiple parties to Golden Rule) the other party to the satisfy transaction?

I would be willing for it to become universal law

Theoretical roots An action is ethical wheny

Table 11.4: Marriott school ethics toolkit.

228 Bradley R. Agle et al.

Ethics of care

Social contracts

Virtue ethics

‘‘What decision would add the most value to us and our stakeholders?’’ It helps me become a Who am I? What kind of Relies on individual ‘‘Let’s consider what better person person would this feelings kind of organizational action make me? All have implicit selfidentity we want to serving biases convey to the public.’’ I would be willing to How would I feel if my Public isn’t always right ‘‘How will this decision have it broadcast to the reasoning and decision Historical/cultural biases affect our image or public appeared on the news? reputation if it becomes public?’’ I am fulﬁlling my Am I fulﬁlling my Difﬁcult to balance ‘‘What do we owe our obligation to societal duties? What conﬂicting duties stakeholders?’’ contribute to a are my obligations or Lack of agreement on ‘‘How might this harmonious society. promises (explicit or duties decision affect our implicit) to others? environment (the market, the national economy, our industry) at large?’’ It beneﬁts those with Am I taking care of the Danger of favoritism and ‘‘How does this decision whom I have a special people who are most nepotism affect the people or trust and obligation. important to me? groups who trust us the Difﬁcult to balance most (e.g., employees, competing relationship customers, etc.)?’’ demands

Majority may disregard rights of the minority

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model 229

230

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Some universities have experimented with developing a professional pledge or oath that students voluntarily take to signal their commitment to ethical business behavior. A noteworthy example is the Harvard MBA Oath (see VanderMey, 2009, http://mbaoath.org). Another technique that fosters commitment to professional integrity is the personal code of ethics, discussed in the previous section. In our courses, we often require students to include a statement of their professional commitments in their personal code of ethics, and encourage them to use the document as a touch point as they go forward in their careers.

11.4. Level Three: Moral Courage and Organizational Savvy The third component of the Marriott School Ethics Framework is moral courage and organizational savvy. Once students have a better grasp of their basic values and have an increased understanding of their application to the managerial context, they are in a much better position to act on those values. It is at this point that we turn our efforts to providing our students with skillsets that focus on actually acting on our values, reasoning, and decisions. In short, it is here that we progress from thought (Components 1 and 2) to action (Component 3). Based on our survey of ethics research and pedagogy, we believe that this is perhaps one of the more unique elements of ethics delivery in the School of Management at Brigham Young University. We strongly emphasize application of theory and providing pragmatic skillsets in this section of our ethics courses. Our conception of moral courage and organizational savvy consists of the following three objectives: (1) to develop the courage to act in accordance with one’s values, (2) to effectively communicate one’s moral reasoning, and (3) to learn to effectively navigate the political environment of organizations with good judgment. While these objectives seem intuitive to us, we were startled to see almost no research has been conducted on the pedagogical foundations of how one should take action in regards to ethical decision-making. While we would argue that this is one of the most important elements of any course on professional ethics, there is alarmingly little in the way of pedagogical support (as evidenced in the lightly populated Table 11.5). Nonetheless, we follow with an application of how those might be applied in an ethics course based on our collective experience while incorporating the paucity of pedagogical research and support for this particular component of the Marriott School Ethics Framework.

11.4.1. Develop Moral Courage to Act in Accordance with One’s Values As we have argued throughout the chapter, we believe strongly that ethics courses need to be as much skills-based as theoretically grounded. Our objective to develop moral courage begins with a theoretical discussion loosely based on the work of Rushworth Kidder (2005) whose broad framework of moral courage provides a nice

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

231

Table 11.5: Level 3 — Moral courage and organizational savvy. Objectives of level 3

Pedagogy

Author(s)

Develop moral courage

Giving voice to values Research and report moral values in business

Gentile (2010)

Effectively communicate moral reasoning

Writing up case studies Giving voice to values

Gentile (2010)

Navigate the political environment using good judgment

Giving voice to values

Gentile (2010)

foundation for classroom discussion and subsequent applications. One of the more critical points in this section, however, is the discussion of how to develop moral courage. Students are given a very practical ﬁve-step list of tools for developing moral courage. The ﬁrst application comes through the use of relevant social psychology research. Our reasoning here is that for most students, moral courage is most often challenged as a result of environmental variables and social inhibitions. Thus, we use several classic examples of psychological research as a medium for students to discuss how they would respond and, more speciﬁcally, how they would prevent themselves from falling into the moral traps of environmental pressures. For example, at least one day in most of our courses is dedicated to obedience and dissent. The case method is very effective here. We show video clips of the nowinfamous Milgram experiments (1974), as well as of Latane and Darling’s (1968) research on a well-known experiment where a room in which a group of people waiting for interviews begins to ﬁll with smoke and no one responds. The discussion centers on how students would respond in this situation and what they would do to ensure right action in those situations. We also use a video version of the Pinto case (Gioia, 1992) and have a series of probing discussion questions that focus on the moral courage and how they would respond in similar situations.

232

Bradley R. Agle et al.

11.4.2. Effectively Communicate Moral Reasoning One of the overarching objectives for any ethics course should be to teach students the language of ethics in a way that is practical and applicable. As much as it would warm our hearts to have our students quoting Aristotle or Kant in making a case to coworkers or bosses, we would be doing them a disservice by not making practical connections to the realities of the workplace. Our objective here, then, is to help train students how to effectively and persuasively communicate their values to others in the workplace. While this is something that is emphasized throughout the course, two speciﬁc course activities are very effective. The ﬁrst activity is a college admissions case where students are put into groups and given a list of ten applicants to the university. The group must make admissions decisions for each on the list. Every applicant has a unique set of value-driven circumstances that make his or her case challenging. For example, one applicant is a blue-chip quarterback with terrible grades while another applicant is the son or daughter of a large donor with lower than average grades. The major point of the exercise is for students to make a compelling case for their value judgments in a nonthreatening situation. More often than not, it provides for very spirited small group discussion that subsequently leads to a larger discussion of what sorts of reasoning and persuasion is most effective. The second activity is a long-answer ﬁnal exam question. A scenario is provided in which the student is asked to take the perspective of the manager of team that needs to perform at a high level, under pressure, and in a situation where being unethical or ‘‘cutting corners’’ would create efﬁciencies. A team member comes to the manager’s ofﬁce and asks, ‘‘Why should I be ethical — especially if it drags out the project?’’ The student is then asked to articulate a well-reasoned and persuasive response. Interestingly, the feedback from students regarding this particular ﬁnal exam question is overwhelmingly positive.

11.4.3. Navigate the Political Environment of Organizations with Good Judgment This is perhaps the most tricky but critical part of all our objectives because of the inherent difﬁculty of teaching the nuances of organizational savvy. It is clear that one must have a realistic understanding of the political landscape of his or her organization to make effective ethical decisions. The bulk of ethics-related decisions made in organizations do not require that one ‘‘charge the hill’’ and resort to ultimata and righteous indignation (Badaracco, 1997). Doing so often alienates coworkers and often puts one’s job in jeopardy. This is why we emphasize the need for and provide tools to develop organizational savvy. It is more than just understanding ofﬁce politics — it is also about knowing when and where to take a stand, and to consider the ongoing context or organizational life and interpersonal relationships. In short, this reﬂects a realistic and unvarnished view of the practical realities of ethics as managers and leaders. Thus, for our purposes organizational savvy means the ability to operate effectively but ethically in ongoing managerial settings. This objective focuses on being ethical while navigating the sometimes treacherous waters of life in organizations.

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

233

Our broad approach to achieving this objective relies heavily on the work of Mary Gentile. Her book, Giving Voice to Values (2010), and the plethora of supporting materials available on the internet provide an excellent, skills-based method for achieving this objective. The premise of the book is grounded in the operating assumption that our fundamental values will be challenged at work and we therefore must be clear on what those values are, and then have a practiced skillset for giving voice to those values. The ability to give voice to values and take an effective ethical stand is as important as anything else taught in an ethics course. Her approach, however, is right in line with our objective: It is important to recognize that there are many different ways to express our values y ; that some may work better in some circumstances than others; that we may be more skillful or simply more likely to use one approach than another y ; that some organizational contexts and conditions (and some sorts of leaders) will have a strong impact on our own and others’ likelihood of expressing values; and that there are things we can do to make it more likely that we will voice our values and that we will do so effectively y . (2010, pp. xli–xlii) Gentile has articulated a very handy process for developing competencies in this regard that includes reﬂection, practice, and coaching materials. All this helps to prepare and equip our students to understand the context in which ethics decisions are made and prepare them to act in keeping with their fundamental values.

11.5. Level Four: Ethical Leadership The fourth level of the model is entitled ‘‘ethical leadership.’’ Following the three previous levels, the focus in this level is to provide opportunities for students to model ethical behavior and encourage those around them to behave ethically. In this level, we discuss (1) the ethical use of power and techniques for handling ethical dilemmas in a politically effective way, (2) managing ethical organizations, and (3) understanding and applying models of organizational responsibility. These three objectives of level four will be described in detail below. For each objective, we provide a brief discussion of the relevant literature and a description of the educational experiences we incorporate into our class. Table 11.6 presents a listing of techniques reported in the literature. These techniques have been used in academic settings to reinforce the classroom teaching of each of the three objectives of ethical leadership.

11.5.1. Exercise Power and Inﬂuence for Good Much has been written on power in both academic and popular press. Power is a central component of leadership and can be used in a positive way to gain useful and important

234

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Table 11.6: Level 4 — Ethical leadership. Objectives of level 4

Pedagogy

Author(s)

Exercise power and inﬂuence for good

Using heroes to teach ethics

Apostolou and Apostolou (1997) Castleberry (2007)

Managing an ethical organization

Understand and apply models of organizational responsibility

White-collar criminals as guest speakers White-collar criminals as guest speakers Panel discussions Interview or survey professionals Involve business and religious leaders in discussions about ethics Local managers who share their experiences Student-generated codes of conduct for classroom Write proposal for university student honor code Study ethics programs in companies Develop personal ethical code Corporate site visits Develop ethics training module Teach ethics integrated with leadership and CSR Experiential learning — pairing students with executives Stakeholder model analysis Community service

Loeb and Ostas (1997) Alsop (2006) Acevedo (2001) Henle (2006)

Beggs et al. (2006) Buff and Yonkers (2005 ) Kidwell (2001)

Couger (1989) Jones and Ottaway (2001) Jones and Ottaway (2001) Weber et al. (2008) Christensen et al. (2007) Christensen et al. (2007)

Dean and Beggs (2006) King and Mayhew (2002)

resources for their organization or department (Braynion, 2004), or can be used to dominate others and for the self-serving purposes of the leader (Maner & Mead, 2010). Pedagogical research suggests several techniques that are helpful additions to the classroom experience. One common form is through case studies. These case studies can be implemented in the classroom through the use of panel discussions (Alsop, 2006), by

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

235

inviting white-collar criminals (Castleberry, 2007; Loeb & Ostas, 1997) or local business or religious leaders (Henle, 2006) as guest speakers in the classroom, and by involving students in interviewing or surveying professionals about their experience with ethical leadership (Acevedo, 2001). Each of these techniques allows students to discover how the use of power is related to ethical leadership. We believe that students need to be introduced to positive examples of power. Donald Phillips describes Abraham Lincoln’s leadership style in the following way, ‘‘Such a leader rejects the use of naked power and instead attempts to motivate and mobilize followers by persuading them to take ownership of their roles in a more grand mission that is shared by all members of the organization’’ (1992, p. 172). Another example of ethical leadership is Gandhi. Students can be asked to watch portions of the movie ‘‘Gandhi’’ or to read excerpts from books about his life. These examples of positive use of power can be extremely helpful to the students, but we have found that they also need to look for positive examples in their own lives. Students are asked to write a paper describing their own ethical hero, the person they most want to emulate with their own ethical behavior. In the paper, they also describe how their hero makes ethical decisions and how that person has shaped or inﬂuenced their own standard of ethics. During the semester, they are asked to reﬂect on their ethical hero and use that guide as they make ethical decisions. Students also must understand the problems with abuse of power. Weidner and Purohit (2009) describe power as addictive and potentially hazardous. One common method to illustrate the potential problems with power is through the use of the movie Quiet Rage. This movie follows the Zimbardo Prison Experiment conducted at Stanford in 1971. The students see young men very quickly taking on the randomly assigned roles of prisoner or guard, and in the process, abuse of power is illustrated. In addition, the students see the positive ‘‘power of one,’’ when the graduate student is able to make a difference by expressing her horror at the experiment.

11.5.2. Managing an Ethical Organization The major conclusion of a very well-known Business Roundtable report (Keough, 1988) states that ‘‘To achieve results, the Chief Executive Ofﬁcer and those around the CEO need to be openly and strongly committed to ethical conduct, and give constant leadership in tending to and renewing the values of the organization.’’ An important aspect of this commitment to ethics and leadership is to create an ethical culture within the organization. In order to do so, organizations must consider speciﬁc aspects of compliance and culture, such as an organizational code of ethics, mission or vision statement, the appointment of an ethics ofﬁcer, and ethics training. Organizations must then ensure that the policies and practices are in place. These cover a broad range of topics including ﬁnancial incentives, hiring and promotion, privacy, the environment, employee safety, work–family issues, etc. In our courses, we help students see the ethical issues within these topics.

236

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Trevino, Weaver, Gibson, and Tofﬂer (1999) found seven outcomes of effective ethical management: (1) reduced unethical/illegal behavior, (2) increased awareness of legal and ethical issues, (3) employees seek out ethics/compliance advice, (4) bad news is delivered to management, (5) violations are reported in the organization, (6) improved decision-making due to the ethics/compliance program, and (7) employee commitment to the program. We use these seven outcomes as the foundation of our discussion on managing an ethical organization. These outcomes provide a foundation for our discussion on managing an ethical organization. Each of the above outcomes is a speciﬁc item that students can look for, or encourage, in an organization. A review of the literature on ethics education suggests that many schools are doing this well. Beggs et al. (2006) suggest having local managers come into the classroom and share their own experience with these issues. Similarly, Jones and Ottaway (2001) recommend that students participate in corporate site visits, with particular focus on their ethics programs. Other programs have asked students to come up with a code of conduct for the classroom (Buff & Yonkers, 2005) or for the university (Kidwell, 2001), or to develop an ethics training module for an organization (Weber, Gerde, & Wasieleski, 2008). One particularly interesting application is for students to read the play An Enemy of the People (Ibsen, 1999) about the experience of a whistle-blower. After reading the play, the students are divided into groups and asked to argue their position (Koehn, 2005).

11.5.3. Understand and Apply Models of Organizational Responsibility The major aspects of organizational responsibility are captured in the literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR is often represented by a pyramid with four levels: economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic (Carroll, 1991). In order for an organization to be successful, they must fulﬁll the economic responsibility, namely to be proﬁtable and make wise strategic decisions. Second, an organization must comply with the legal and regulatory requirements. The third aspect of the CSR pyramid is to behave ethically. This entails meeting legitimate stakeholder needs, avoiding questionable practices, and asserting ethical leadership. The fourth and last portion of the pyramid is to be a good corporate citizen and promote human welfare and goodwill. Many academic institutions are including activities that help promote discussion and application of models of organizational responsibility in their curriculum. These can be incorporated into the curriculum through community service (King & Mayhew, 2002), or an experiential learning process matching students with executives (Christensen et al., 2007), or students can be assigned to complete a stakeholder analysis of an organization (Dean & Beggs, 2006). In the Marriott School, we use cases to discuss how organizations respond to CSR issues, for example, Merck Company and the River Blindness case, Timberland and their involvement with volunteerism, Home Depot and their hiring practices,

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

237

Johnson and Johnson and their response to the Tylenol poisoning. Examples such as these provide students with appropriate organizational role models and illustrate that many organizations are striving to respond to various stakeholders and fulﬁll their social responsibilities. Another helpful tool is to invite guest speakers from various organizations to present information about their organization’s stance on CSR. This provides an opportunity for students to hear about what organizations are doing, and also to ask questions about CSR in the ‘‘real world.’’ One tool we use to help students understand how to manage an ethical organization and how to apply models of organizational responsibility is to assign a CSR/ethics report. The report requires the student to research and conduct an analysis of the CSR efforts and the ethics programs of an organization using the organization’s website and publications, along with external media sources. The students assess the areas of involvement and speciﬁc programs in CSR and the formal ethics programs of the organization. The students are also asked to look for external media reports on the organization’s ethical or unethical behavior. This assignment provides an opportunity to carefully review and analyze the ethics and CSR efforts of an organization of interest to the student, and to see the potential impact of the organization’s decisions. A variation on this assignment is to put the students into groups with each student completing an analysis of one organization, followed by a section comparing and contrasting the CSR/ethics programs of all the organizations.

11.6. Agenda for Utilizing the Complete Collegiate Educational Experience One of the most oft-repeated questions regarding business ethics education is whether it should be provided through stand-alone courses in business ethics as primarily discussed in this chapter or through integration in other disciplinary courses. Most business ethicists would reply that the answer is ‘‘both.’’ There are certain objectives to business ethics that can best be met in a dedicated course while other objectives can best be met through disciplinary courses. Because the development of strong moral principles and integrity is a difﬁcult challenge, we believe that such an undertaking requires a holistic approach to the subject. Just as businesses have found that a rigorous ethics culture requires various elements including leadership example, organizational infrastructure, training, communication, selection, etc., so too does the development of individual integrity require a number of elements — in addition to the stand-alone course and ethics integration. For that reason, our Marriott School agenda includes thinking about each element of students’ collegiate experience and how it relates to their ethical development. What elements of a student’s collegiate experience can we think about inﬂuencing? The most obvious are their courses — stand-alone ethics, philosophy, or theology courses, elective ethics courses, and required and elective disciplinary courses. Another important part of their experience is their extracurricular activities, such as participation in clubs, athletic teams, student government, study-abroad, volunteering, etc. Students also become a part of their university and can be inﬂuenced by

238

Bradley R. Agle et al.

experiencing how their organization functions from an ethics perspective, including things such as honor codes, organizational codes of ethics, organizational ombudsmen and ethics ofﬁcers, ethics hotlines, etc. Finally, most students will hold a job at some point in their collegiate experience. Given that we have various business ethics objectives, and elements to a student’s collegiate experience, it seems to make sense to examine how we might best match the objectives with the student objectives. As an example of such matching, we postulate that ethical decision-making skills can best be developed in stand-alone ethics courses taught by appropriately trained faculty members. We might also argue that such a stand-alone course provides a very effective arena for the examination of personal values. Because ethical sensitivity will naturally be heightened in a stand-alone ethics course, and thus a stand-alone ethics course can be useful in meeting the objective of increasing a students’ moral awareness, we believe that ethical awareness can best be developed in discipline-speciﬁc courses and through the integration of assignments from the students’ work experience. Looking for ethics issues in coursework not formally associated with ethics forces a student to develop a higher moral sensitivity. In addition, students’ understanding of various laws, regulations, and ethics issues attendant to various professions can best be learned in discipline-speciﬁc courses. While professors trained in ethics are likely to provide better education in ethical decision-making, they are not at all capable of having the intimate knowledge of the ethics issues associated with various professions like their business discipline-trained colleagues. Thus, teamwork among colleagues in the business school is essential. While various aspects of ethical leadership can be discussed and concepts learned in an ethics or leadership course, moral leadership and character can best be developed in extracurricular activities such as volunteering, study-abroad, or serving in leadership positions in organizations, etc. For example, we’ve seen students learn the concepts of developing and enhancing an ethics infrastructure for an organization in class. We’ve also assigned students to develop and enhance such structures in organizations in which they are a part (clubs, student government, volunteer organizations, etc.). The increased knowledge gained from actually attempting to do these things as opposed to simply learning the concepts has been geometric. Also, objectives such as development of empathy are very difﬁcult to accomplish in a classroom. However, various professors have reported phenomenal results from having students engage in service-work, volunteer trips to underprivileged areas, etc. There are also various dangers to such endeavors such as making students feel that they have been forced to engage in ‘‘volunteer’’ work that have to be watched out for. Nevertheless, there are things that can only be accomplished outside of a classroom setting. Noted ethicist Derek Bok suggested the following:

Moral responsibility cannot develop through rules and penalties alone. It must grow out of a genuine concern for others and a desire to respect their legitimate interests. The best way of acquiring such concern is to experience situations in which one can appreciate the effects of one’s actions on others and understand how one’s own interests are affected in return. (Bok, 1988, p. 9)

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

239

As a ﬁnal example of matching, we submit that the university as an organization can provide powerful modeling for students. The university is the primary organization the students will be a part of during several of their most important developmental years. Therefore, aspects of the organization such as ethics and honor codes, ethics training, ethics ofﬁcers and ombudsman, etc. can have a strong modeling effect on students. When they enter organizations or become leaders in those organizations, they should be able to draw not only on the knowledge they gained in their classes, but also based on their experience being a part of the university organization for four or more years. These are just a few examples of how we might be able to think about using the student’s entire collegiate experience to meet our ethics objectives. Derek Bok suggests the following: Like it or not, [universities] will affect the moral development of their students by the ways in which they administer their rules of conduct, by the standard they achieve in dealing with ethical issues confronting the institution, by the manner in which they counsel their students and coach their athletic teams. The only question is whether they choose to proceed deliberately and with forethought. (1988, p. 6) As evidenced by the multitude of citations contained in this chapter, we acknowledge and express appreciation to so many of our colleagues who have proceeded deliberately and with great forethought in the advancement of business ethics education. Meanwhile, we believe that as a professional group we yet have much work to do in helping our students become the kind of ethical leaders for which our world can only hope.

Acknowledgment We express our appreciation to Bethany Hansen, Marc-Charles Ingerson, Jennifer Kellis, Aaron Lee, and Melissa Porter for their assistance in the preparation of this chapter.

References Acevedo, A. (2001). Of fallacies and curricula: A case of business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(2), 157–170. Adams, J. S., Harris, C., & Carley, S. S. (1998). Challenges in teaching business ethics: Using role set analysis of early career dilemmas. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(12), 1325–1335. Albrecht, W. S., Hill, N. C., & Albrecht, C. C. (2006). The ethics development model applied to declining ethics in accounting. Australian Accounting Review, 16(38), 30–40. Alsop, R. J. (2006). Business ethics education in business schools: A commentary. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 11–14. Apostolou, B., & Apostolou, N. (1997). Heroes as a context for teaching ethics. Journal of Education for Business, 73(2), 121–125.

240

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Badaracco, J. (1997). Deﬁning moments: When managers must choose between right and wrong. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Beggs, J. M., Dean, K. L., Gillespie, J., & Weiner, J. (2006). The unique challenges of ethics instruction. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 5–10. Bishop, T. R. (1992). Integrating business ethics into an undergraduate curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(4), 291–299. Bok, D. (1988). Can Higher Education Foster Higher Morals? Business & Society Review, 66(3), 4–12. Braynion, P. (2004). Power and leadership. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 18(6), 447–463. Brinkmann, J. (2009). Using Ibsen in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 11–24. Buff, C. L., & Yonkers, V. (2005). Using student generated codes of conduct in the classroom to reinforce business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(2), 101–110. Carroll, A., & Buchholtz, A. (2011). Educating students in corporate governance and ethics. In: D. L. Swanson & D. G. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics education (pp. 285–304). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. Castleberry, S. B. (2007). Prison ﬁeld trips: Can white-collar criminals positively affect the ethical and legal behavior of marketing and MBA students? Journal of Marketing Education, 29(1), 5–17. Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L. P., Hoffman, W. M., & Carrier, J. (2007). Ethics, CSR, and sustainability education in the Financial Times top 50 global business schools: Baseline data and future research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4), 347–368. Cohen, R., & Gotlieb, C. C. (1989). Educating tomorrow’s professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 8(2-3), 193–199. Couger, J. D. (1989). Preparing IS students to deal with ethical issues. MIS Quarterly, 13(2), 211–218. Dean, K. L., & Beggs, J. M. (2006). University professors and teaching ethics: Conceptualizations and expectations. Journal of Management Education, 30(1), 15–44. Desjardins, J. R., & Diedrich, E. (2003). Learning what it really costs: Teaching business ethics with life-cycle case studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 33–42. Dunfee, T. W., & Robertson, D. C. (1988). Integrating ethics into the business school curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics, 7(11), 847–859. Garaventa, E. (1998). Drama: A tool for teaching business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(3), 535–545. Gentile, M. (2010). Giving voice to values: How to speak your mind when you know what’s right. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2001). Lights, camera, action: Teaching ethical decision making through the cinematic experience. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(1), 79–87. Gioia, D. A. (1992). Pinto ﬁres and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5–6), 379–389. Gowen, C. R., III., Hanna, N., Jacobs, L. W., Keys, D. E., & Weiss, D. E. (1996). Integrating business ethics into a graduate program. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(6), 671–679. Hawley, D. D. (1991). Business ethics and social responsibility in ﬁnance instruction: An abdication of responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(9), 711–721.

Business Ethics Education: The Marriott School Model

241

Henle, C. A. (2006). Bad apples or bad barrels? A former CEO discusses the interplay of person and situation with implications for business education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(3), 346–355. Ibsen, H. (1999). An enemy of the people. New York, NY: Dover Publications. Jones, G. E., & Ottaway, R. N. (2001). The effectiveness of corporate ethics on-site visits for teaching business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 5(2), 141–156. Kavathatzopoulos, I. (2003). The use of information and communication technology in the training for ethical competence in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 43–51. Keough, J. (1988). Corporate ethics: A prime business asset. New York, NY: Business Roundtable. Kidder, R. (2005). Moral courage. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Kidwell, L. A. (2001). Student honor codes as a tool for teaching professional ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(1–2), 45–49. King, P. M., & Mayhew, M. J. (2002). Moral judgment development in higher education: Insights from the deﬁning issues test. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 247–270. Koehn, D. (2005). Transforming our students: Teaching business ethics post-Enron. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(1), 137–151. Latane, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander intervention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 215–221. LeClair, D. T., Ferrell, L., Montuori, L., & Willems, C. (1999). The use of a behavioral simulation to teach business ethics. Teaching Business Ethics, 3(3), 283–296. Loeb, S. E., & Ostas, D. T. (1997). A business ethics experiential learning module: The Maryland business school experience. Teaching Business Ethics, 1(1), 21–32. Maner, J. K., & Mead, N. L. (2010). The essential tension between leadership and power: When leaders sacriﬁce group goals for the sake of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(3), 482–497. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Phillips, D. T. (1992). Lincoln on leadership: Executive strategies for tough times. New York, NY: Warner Books. Raisner, J. A. (1997). Using the ‘‘ethical environment’’ paradigm to teach business ethics: The case of the maquiladoras. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12–13), 1331–1346. Sanyal, R. N. (2000). An experiential approach to teaching ethics in international business. Teaching Business Ethics, 4(2), 137–149. Sheppard, J. P., & Young, M. (2007). The routes of moral development and the impact of exposure to the Milgram obedience study. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(4), 315–333. Trevino, L. K., & McCabe, D. (1994). Meta-learning about business ethics: Building honorable business school communities. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(6), 405–416. Trevino, L. K., Weaver, G. R., Gibson, D. G., & Tofﬂer, B. L. (1999). Managing ethics and legal compliance: What works and what hurts. California Management Review, 41(2), 131–151. VanderMey, A. (2009). Harvard’s MBA oath goes viral. Business Week, Retrieved from http:// www.businessweek.com, July 8, 2011. Van Es, R. (2003). Inside and outside the insider: A ﬁlm workshop in practical ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 89–97. Weber, J., Gerde, V. W., & Wasieleski, D. M. (2008). A blueprint for designing an ethics program in an academic setting. In: D. L. Swanson & D. G. Fisher (Eds), Advancing business ethics education (pp. 85–101). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

242

Bradley R. Agle et al.

Weidner, C., & Purohit, Y. (2009). When power has leaders: Some indicators of poweraddiction among organizational leaders. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communication and Conﬂict, 13(1), 83–99. Wipperfurth, H. (2002). Enron scandal touches off boom in ethics education. Crain’s New York Business, 15 April, pp. 47–50.

About the Authors Christopher P. Adkins (PhD, The College of William & Mary) is Executive Director of the Undergraduate Business Program at the College of William & Mary, Mason School of Business. In his research, Chris studies the psychology of business decision-making for social and environmental impacts. In particular he leverages ﬁndings from cognitive neuroscience and social psychology for new research directions and practical insights for business leadership and educational programs. Current projects include: an empathy-based model of ethical decision-making, the heuristics of sustainability decision-making, and the psychology of triple-bottom line value creation in business. In his teaching, Chris has pioneered the application of the MBA-level Giving Voice to Values approach with undergraduates. With sustainability consulting ﬁrm Saatchi S, Chris led the ﬁrst personal sustainability program at a university. In 2010, he co-founded the Corporate & College Collaborative for Sustainability, a new partnership of business leaders, faculty and students for innovation in undergraduate sustainability education. Bradley R. Agle (PhD, University of Washington) is the George Romney Endowed professor, professor of Ethics and Leadership in the Marriott School of Management, and a fellow in the Wheatley Institution at Brigham Young University. Previously, he spent 17 years as a professor in the Katz Graduate School of Business at the University of Pittsburgh, where he also served for eight years as the inaugural director of the Berg Center for Ethics and Leadership. He is an active researcher with articles in the top journals in management and ethics. He is also a recipient of multiple teaching awards, including Distinguished Professor of the Year honors. His teaching brought the University of Pittsburgh the distinction of being the #2 ranked eMBA program in the world in business ethics by Business Week. He also created the Certiﬁcate Program in Leadership and Ethics, the world’s ﬁrst integrated undergraduate specialty in ethical leadership in business. He currently chairs the Conference on Ethics Teaching in Universities, sponsored by the Wheatley Institution and the Society for Business Ethics. Alison L. Antes is an assistant professor of Organizational Leadership. She earned her PhD in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from the University of Oklahoma. She conducted ethical decision making and ethics instruction research at the University of Oklahoma’s Center for Applied Social Research and coordinated the University’s ﬁrst campus-wide, cross-disciplinary ethics instructional program. She also earned her master degree in I/O Psychology, with an emphasis in measurement and statistics, at the University of Oklahoma. Dr. Antes has published her research on cognitive and social processes facilitating creative problem-solving, ethical decision making, and leadership in ethics, leadership, and creativity journals, such as Ethics and Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, Leadership Quarterly, and Creativity

244

About the Authors

Research Journal. Dr. Antes’ current research focuses on how leaders solve complex problems and make ethical decisions, along with techniques for leader development. Dr. Antes also has interests in instructional design, organizational creativity, and innovation management. Dr. Antes is a member of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the Academy of Management. J. Alberto Arago´n-Correa is a full professor of Strategic Management at the University of Granada (Spain) and visiting professor at U.C. Berkeley (USA). He earned his PhD in Business Administration and Economics from the University of Seville. He has published in top tier journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, British Journal of Management, Long Range Planning, Journal of Business Research, Ecological Economics, and Sustainable Development, among others. He has been deputy dean in the School of Economics and Business for seven years and chair of Department of Management at University of Granada. He has led different research projects supported by the European Commission analyzing how to integrate new practices in business curricula at university management institutions. Kevin Basik, Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Basik (PhD), is the chief of the Scholarship Division at the US Air Force Academy’s Center for Character & Leadership Development. In addition, he is the instructor of the Foundations of Leadership Development course, and has been an instructor and course director in numerous leadership, organizational behavior, and industrial/organizational psychology courses at the Air Force Academy and the Citadel. In his current role, Lt. Col. Basik is responsible for developing and integrating the conceptual framework for developing leaders of character. In addition, he serves as the senior editor of the Journal of Character & Leadership Integration, and is involved in executing the Academy’s comprehensive assessment plan for character and leadership development. His areas of interest include behavioral integrity, accountability, leadership development, political skill, and social inﬂuence. Lt. Col. Basik received his PhD in Management from Florida State University’s College of Business. Blanca L. Delgado-Ma´rquez, PhD in Economics, University of Granada, also holds a master degree in Economics and Business, University of Granada. She is currently assistant professor at the Department of International and Spanish Economics in the Faculty of Economics and Business at the University of Granada (Spain). Her research interests cover the analysis of trustworthiness’ dimensions (i.e., integrity, ability, and benevolence) into management education speciﬁcally, and the inﬂuence of trust and trustworthiness’ dimensions in economics and management in general, among others. Indeed, her thesis was focused on trust and trustworthiness at interpersonal level, with applications to several ﬁelds, such as university management education. Louis C. Gasper, has been a member since 1992 of the resident faculty of the Graduate School of Management in the University of Dallas. He is presently associate professor of Management and Director of the Center for Business Ethics. After taking his PhD from Duke University in 1969, Professor Gasper taught economics at the University of Arizona. In 1975, he became an economist with the

About the Authors

245

Banking Committee in the United States House of Representatives and Counsel to the Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee. Following on the presidential elections of 1980, he was a member of President-Elect Reagan’s transition team for the Treasury Department and soon after was appointed senior economist to the Finance Committee of the United States Senate. Professor Gasper served in both Reagan Administrations as executive assistant to the President of the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) and then as its Acting President. He received the highest commendation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Secretary’s Award for Excellence. Professor Gasper is a Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, membership in which is awarded by the Pope in recognition of ‘‘remarkable service’’ to the Roman Catholic Church. Mary C. Gentile, PhD, is the director of an innovative curriculum, Giving Voice to Values (www.GivingVoiceToValues.org), launched by Aspen Institute as incubator and, along with Yale SOM, founding partner; it is now supported by BabsonCollege. This pioneering approach to values-driven leadership has been featured in the Financial Times, Harvard Business Review, McKinsey Quarterly online, Stanford Social Innovation Review, strategy+businesss, etc. and is being piloted in well over 125 business schools and organizations globally. Her book, Giving Voice to Values: How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What’s Right was published by Yale University Press (www.MaryGentile.com, 2010). Gentile, faculty at Babson College and educational consultant, was previously at Harvard Business School. She is author of numerous books and articles, with her BA from College of William and Mary and PhD from State University of New York, Buffalo. Lindsey Godwin is an assistant professor of management in the Division of Business at Champlain College. She holds a MS in Conﬂict Analysis and Resolution from George Mason University and a PhD in Organizational Behavior from Case Western Reserve University. She also holds a double BA in psychology and sociology from Ohio Wesleyan University. Godwin’s research interests include morality and social responsibility in business, moral imagination and innovation in organizational life, and positive organizational development and whole-system’s change. Her work has been published in a variety of outlets including the Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Training & Management Development Methods, Journal of Online Education, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Information & Organization, Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, and presented at both national and international conferences such as the Annual Academy of Management Meetings, the Babson–Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, the Institute for Behavioral and Applied Management Conference, the Annual Society for Business Ethics Meetings, and the EABIS Experiential Learning Congress. David W. Hart (PhD, State University of New York at Albany) is currently an associate professor and director of the Romney Institute of Public Management at the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. His current research focuses on both theoretical and applied ethics, business-government interaction, and the external environment of organizations.

246

About the Authors

Heh Jason Huang received his PhD from Washington State University in 1994. He is now a full-time professor at National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. He was a visiting professor at Zhejiang University, Hangzhou in 2007 and at Tongji University, Shanghai in 2010. He had eight-year working experience at a prominent bank, the International Commercial Bank of China in Taiwan. Heh Jason Huang’s research interests includes human resource management, cross-cultural analysis of HRM practices, trust, and integrity issues in workplace. His work has been published in Human Resource Management Journal, Asia Paciﬁc Journal of Human Resources, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Sun Yat-sen Management Review, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Personnel Review, Journal of Business Ethics, etc. Professor Huang has a lot of international experience. He had served as the dean of international affairs at NSYSU and served for the Founding Committee of APAIE. From 1998 to 2002, he had participated in the APEC Training and Certiﬁcation Program, representing Chinese Taipei. For professional afﬁliations, Professor Huang has memberships of the following organizations: Academy of Management, Asian Academy of Management, Management Science Association Taiwan, Human Resource Development Association Taiwan, and Statistician Association Taiwan. Nuria E. Hurtado-Torres — PhD in Business Administration and Economics, University of Granada — is an associate professor at the University of Granada (Spain). She has published in top journals such as Journal of Environmental Management, Information Technology and Management and Journal of Organizational Change Management, among others. She has been coordinator for the Degree in Business Administration in the School of Economics and Business and secretary of the Department of Management at the University of Granada. She has participated in different research projects supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education analyzing how to integrate new practices and policies at business schools. Cynthia Ingols is an associate professor, School of Management (SOM), Simmons College, Boston, MA. At the SOM, she directs the internship program for undergraduate and MBA students. In addition, Ingols teaches courses in Organizational Change and Career Strategies to MBA students. Ingols is the faculty director of Strategic Leadership for Women, an executive education program with a global reach that strengths the leadership skills, self-conﬁdence, and motivations of its women participants. Early in her career, she received her doctorate from the Harvard University Graduate School of Education in Organization Behavior and taught Management Communication at the Harvard Business School. Ingols focuses her consulting work in three areas: conducting diagnostic work to promote change in organizations; developing interactive executive education programs, particularly using cases and simulations; and, coaching executives to enhance their leadership capacity and careers. Ingols’ research and publications follow similar lines. Her research on executive education programs has been published in leading journals, such as Harvard Business Review, Organizational Dynamics, and Training. Her research work on creating innovative organizational structures and change was published in the Design Management Journal. She has published numerous articles about careers in journals such as the Journal of Career Development and Human

About the Authors

247

Resource Development Quarterly. She co-authored three books: Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit (2011); Take Charge of Your Career (2005); & A Smart, Easy Guide to Interviewing (2003). Hannes Leroy obtained his master degree in Industrial- and Organizational Psychology at Ghent University and is a doctoral student in a PhD program in Applied Economics at the Center for Organization Studies Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. His research interests include leadership and employee development, employee well-being and work motivation. His past research focuses on the keywords of authenticity, behavioral integrity, and mindfulness. Aaron Miller is an Assistant Teaching Professor in BYU’s Romney Institute of Public Administration where he teaches business ethics and nonproﬁt structure and ﬁnance. He is also the faculty director for the Romney Institute’s Grantwell program and BYU’s Social Venture Competition. A member of the Utah Bar, Aaron is also an attorney practicing small business and nonproﬁt law. Mary Grace Neville is an associate professor of business and holder of the John Shearn Chair in Business at Southwestern University. She earned her PhD in Organizational Behavior from Case Western Reserve University, and her MBA in strategic management at the Wharton School of Business. She also holds a bachelors degree from Northwestern University, and has done advanced studies in gestalt therapy theory at the Gestalt Institute of Cleveland. Neville studies, teaches, and consults on business behaviors and relationships that create world beneﬁt. She follows a teacher– scholar–professional model of social change, each stream of work co-creating the others. She is oriented toward pedagogy with roots in experiential learning and dialogue, and toward practice understood from systems theories. Neville’s work has been published in a variety of outlets including Journal of Management Education, Business and Society Review, Journal for Quality & Participation, and an edited volume of social healing interventions titled Mending the World. Both in writing and at national and international conferences, Neville advocates for positive change at the intersection of business and society. Joseph A. Petrick is a professor of Management and International Business and executive director of the Institute for Business Integrity at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio. He earned his PhD from Pennsylvania State University as a Woodrow Wilson Fellow and his MBA from the University of Cincinnati, with postdoctoral work at the University of Bonn in Germany and the University of Tokyo in Japan. He is SPHR-certiﬁed and has served on the National Board of Directors of the Human Resource Certiﬁcation Institute (HRCI), and is currently the President of the International Business Honor Society. He has published widely in the ﬁelds of management ethics, sustainable stakeholder capitalism, corporate leadership, and management education including the book, Management Ethics: Integrity at Work, and over 90 refereed journal articles in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business and Society Review, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Academy of Management Executive, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Professional Ethics, Journal of Management Development, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, and

248

About the Authors

other journals. He has worked as a manager and organizational ethics consultant in the private, public, and nonproﬁt sectors and taught business ethics at the undergraduate, graduate, and executive education levels domestically and globally. He also is the CEO of two consulting ﬁrms, Integrity Capacity Associates and Performance Leadership Associates. Tony Simons, as an associate professor at Cornell University’s School of Hotel Administration, teaches, studies, and speaks on integrity, trust, accountability, and measurement in leadership, teamwork, sales, and negotiations. Earned trust makes a huge difference for change implementation, creative problem-solving, employee retention, customer service, sales, and ultimately, for company proﬁtability. Simons teaches people how to earn more of these beneﬁts. Professor Simons wrote The Integrity Dividend: Leading by the Power of Your Word (Jossey Bass, 2008), and has published over 28 journal articles for both managerial and scholarly audiences. His work has appeared in the Harvard Business Review, Organization Science, the Journal of Applied Psychology, and the Academy of Management Journal. He has spoken and trained executives in negotiation skills and in leadership at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School, Cornell University and in seminars around the United States and Europe. Simons earned his PhD from Northwestern University in 1993. He is also a certiﬁed ﬁrewalk instructor, and he leads monthly ﬁrewalk empowerment workshops near his home in Ithaca, New York. His business website is http:// IntegrityDividend.com. Agata Stachowicz-Stanusch, PhD, DSc, is an associate professor of management at The Silesian University of Technology. She is the Head of Management & Marketing Department. Agata has authored and edited seven books including co-authoring of Management through Collaboration: Teaming in a Networked World edited by Charles Wankel; Organizational Immunity to Corruption: Building Theoretical and Research Foundations (IAP, 2010), The Core Values of Universities in the Context of Different National Cultures (SUT Press, 2009), The Power of Values (Helion, 2007), Management by Values: Modern Company Development Perspective (SUT Press, 2004), and Marketing Culture (PWN, 2001). She is also an author of over 70 research papers in national/international journals and conference proceedings. She was a reviewer of Academy of Management (AOM), European Academy of Management (EURAM), and Journal of Brand Management (Palgrave MacMillan). Agata is a member of Polish Academy of Sciences, and the Committee on Organizational and Management Sciences Department Katowice and PRME Working Group on AntiCorruption. She is also a co-founder of Organizational and Management Journal edited by the Silesian University of Technology and editorial board’s member of Global Management Journal. Sarah Stookey is an associate professor of Management and Organization at Central Connecticut State University. Her interest in studying business and management arose from almost a decade of promoting community-based economic development in Nicaragua. She also spent several years helping to create grassroots-managed lending programs in the Philippines and Zambia. She is motivated by a desire to

About the Authors

249

create organizations that respond to the needs of society broadly deﬁned. In her research and teaching she is interested in articulating and evaluating the economic and philosophical assumptions underlying management theory and practice. She has developed a new framework that challenges the assumption of money as ﬁxed and proposes understanding money as a social — and organizational — construction. In her classes on social issues and globalization Sarah uses a multidisciplinary perspective to help students see familiar norms and apparent imperatives of business activity in new lights and to encourage them to take seriously their own experience and values. As a faculty member she founded ‘‘Community Central,’’ a student-run community center in downtown New Britain, CT. She holds a BA from Harvard, an MA in Economics from the University of California, Riverside and MBA and PhD from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Jeffery A. Thompson (PhD, University of Minnesota) is an associate professor in the Romney Institute of Public Management at Brigham Young University. Professor Thompson’s research focuses on meaningful work and organizational ethics. His research has appeared in Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Business Ethics Quarterly. He teaches Organizational Behavior and Business Ethics at the Marriott School of Management. Sˇpela Trefalt is an assistant professor in Organizational Behavior at the Simmons School of Management in Boston. She is a faculty afﬁliate of the Center for Gender in Organizations at Simmons and of The Berger Institute for Work, Family, and Children at Claremont McKenna College in California. Trefalt studies issues that professionals — men and women — face when managing competing demands of work and life outside of work. Her research is aimed at understanding the individuals’ experiences in managing work and nonwork demands. She earned her DBA in Management from the Harvard Business School, her MBA from University of Kansas, and her BA in Law from University of Ljubljana in Slovenia. Before her academic career, Trefalt spent six years as a human resources manager and consultant, and eight years working in the media in Slovenia. Lori L. Wadsworth (PhD, University of Utah) is an associate professor in the Romney Institute of Public Management at Brigham Young University. Professor Wadsworth’s research focuses on work-family interaction, particularly how organizations can assist employees in balancing their work and family life. Within this general theme, her research includes ﬂexible beneﬁts, alternative work schedules, social support, mentoring, and ethical behavior in the workplace. Her research has been published in Public Administration Review, Review of Public Personnel Administration, Connecticut Law Review, and Journal of Family and Economic Issues. She teaches Human Resource Management and Ethics in Management. Charles Wankel is an associate professor of Management at St. John’s University, New York, earned his doctorate from New York University. Charles is on the Rotterdam School of Management Dissertation Committee and is Honorary Vice Rector of the Poznan University of Business. He has authored and edited about 30

250

About the Authors

books including the best-selling Management, 3rd ed. (Prentice-Hall, 1986), eight volumes in the IAP series Research in Management Education and Development, the Handbook of 21st Century Management (SAGE, 2008), and the Encyclopedia of Business in Today’s World (SAGE, 2009), which received the American Library Association’s Outstanding Business Reference Source Award. He is the leading founder and director of scholarly virtual communities for management professors, currently directing eight with thousands of participants in more than 70 nations. He has been a visiting professor in Lithuania at the Kaunas University of Technology (Fulbright Fellowship) and the University of Vilnius (United Nations Development Program and Soros Open Society Foundation funding). Ethan P. Waples is an assistant professor of Management at the University of Central Oklahoma. He received both his MS and PhD in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from the University of Oklahoma. His primary areas of interest include sensemaking and leadership, leadership and emotions, and business ethics. His research can be found in outlets such as Ethics and Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, Science and Engineering Ethics, and Creativity Research Journal. In addition, he has presented numerous papers at regional, national, and international conferences, including the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, The Academy of Management, and the Southwest Academy of Management. Dr. Waples teaches Human Resource Management, Organizational Behavior, and Leadership for both undergraduates and the MBA program at UCO.

Author Index

Acevedo, A., 234–235 Adams, J. S., 220, 225–226 Adkins, C., 107 Agle, B. R., 217 Ainina, F., 50 Albrecht, C. C., 218 Albrecht, W. S., 218 Alliger, G. M., 38 Alsop, R. J., 219–220, 225–226, 234 Altman, D. G., 35 Alves, H., 5 Alvesson, M., 202 Andrews, K. R., 3 Antes, A. L., 6, 15–18, 20–24, 25, 30–31, 33–39, 41–42 Apostolou, B., 234 Apostolou, N., 234 Aquino, K., 90, 97 Arago´n-Correa, J. A., 89 Argyris, C., 158 Arnold, D., 53 Arthur, W., 40 Ashford, S. J., 147 Astin, J. A., 145 Athavale, M., 173, 175 Atwater, B. J., 173–174 Auchincloss, L., 82, 88 Aurand, T. W., 173, 176 Avolio, B. J., 141 Badaracco, J., 232 Baer, J., 31, 35 Baer, R. A., 145 Baetz, M., 16, 33 Baldwin, T. T., 27, 32 Bandura, A., 141 Barksdale, C. D., 40 Barnes, C. D., 25 Barraquier, A., 6 Barry, B., 156

Bartlett, F. C., 80 Bartoszek, T., 98 Basik, K., 135, 147 Bass, B. M., 145 Baudrillard, J., 203 Bazerman, M. H., 26–27 Bean, D. F., 32, 92, 95 Beauvais, L. L., 95 Becker, T. E., 156 Beechler, S., 208 Beggs, J. M., 225–226, 234, 236 Behrman, J. I., 205 Bendheim, L., 175 Bennett, W., 38 Bennis, W., 40, 174 Beqiri, M. S., 4 Berger, I. E., 5 Bergman, J., 177 Bernardi, R. A., 95 Billsberry, J., 197 Birnik, A., 197 Bishop, T. R., 225–226 Bisping, T.O., 91–92 Black, M., 202 Blake-Beard, S., 126 Blass, F. R., 147 Blish, J., 88 Block, L., 88 Blood, M. R., 183 Bluck, S., 19 Blume, B. D., 32 Bodwell, C., 50 Bogue, E. G., 4 Bok, D., 178 Bolman, L. G., 172 Bolt, R., 88 Bommer, W. H., 40 Bosco, S. M., 95 Boyacigiller, N. A., 208 Boyatzis, R. E., 139

252

Author Index

Boyle, M. E., 95, 188 Bradley, J.C., 32, 37 Braynion, P., 234 Brinkmann, J., 30, 156, 188, 219–220, 225 Brock, M. E., 22, 30–31, 35 Brodzinski, J., 50 Brooks, R., 178 Brouer, R. L., 147 Brown, K. W., 145 Brown, M. E., 4, 26–27, 50–51, 53, 156 Brown, R.P., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31, 34–39, 41–42 Buchholtz, A., 225–226 Buff, C. L., 225, 227, 234, 236 Burke, C. B., 196 Burns, G. N., 40 Butterﬁeld, K. D., 16, 50, 74, 91, 98 Byrne, C. L., 19, 21 Caldwell, C., 38, 91–92, 97 Cameron, K., 57 Campbell, N., 175 Carbo, J., 5 Carley, S. S., 220, 225–226 Carlson, L. E., 145 Carmody, J., 145 Carr, D., 206–207 Carrier, D., 80 Carrier, J., 4, 225–227, 234, 236 Carroll, A. B., 225–226, 236 Carter, G. W., 37 Carter, S. L., 50, 126, 157, 162 Castleberry, S. B., 220–221, 225–226, 234–235 Caughron, J. J., 19, 21, 24 Ceasar, D., 147 Cha, S. E., 147 Chan, D., 37 Chen, L., 50 Chen, Y., 54 Cheng, C. M., 145 Chew, E. B., 176 Chickering, A. W., 178 Chiffriller, S., 177 Christensen, L. J., 4, 225–227, 234, 236

Christian, M. S., 32, 37 Christiansen, N. D., 40 Christie, A., 88 Coburn, T., 50 Cohen, R., 225–226 Cole, M., 54 Coles, R., 74 Confucius,, 156, 159, 197 Connelly, M. S., 21, 35–39 Connelly, S., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31, 33–34, 38–39, 41–42 Conrad, J., 88 Cooperrider, D. L., 156 Cornelius, N., 91, 97 Couger, J. D., 225, 227, 234 Crane, A., 4 Crane, S., 88 Cranton, P., 54 Creswell, J. D., 145 Cullen, J. B., 27–28 Cunningham, P., 54 Cunningham, P.H., 5 Daly, J., 177 Dane, E., 145 Dao, V., 5 Darley, J. M., 231 Davis, J. H., 99 Davis, R., 173, 175 Davy, J., 50 Day, E. A., 40 De Tocqueville, A., 205 Deal, J. J., 35 Deal, T. E., 172 Dean, K. L., 225–226, 234, 236 Deci, E., 140 Deery, S., 156 Deetz, S., 202 DeFillippi, R., 4 Delgado-Ma´rquez, B. L., 89 DeMoranville, C., 173, 176 DeMoss, M., 4, 91 Desjardins, J. R., 225–226 Desplaces, D. E., 95

Author Index Devenport, L. D., 6, 16–18, 20–25, 30–31, 34–39, 41–42 Dewett, T., 53 Dewey, J., 184 DiClemente, C., 54 Diedrich, E., 225–226 Donaldson, L., 174 Donaldson, T., 157 Douglas, C., 147 Drake, R., 54 Drumwright, M. E., 5 Dufresne, R. L., 91 Dunfee, T. W., 157, 220–221, 225–226 Dunnette, M. D., 37 Dunning, D., 143 Dutton, J. E., 57, 141 Eastering, D., 50 Eden, L., 5 Edens, P.S., 40 Edmondson, A. C., 141, 147 Edwards, B. D., 32, 37 Elias, R. Z., 206 Eliot, T. S., 88 Elliot, A. J., 138 Ely, R. J., 173 Embley, K., 139 Epley, N., 143 Epstein, M. J., 5 Erhard, W. H., 162 Ericsson, K. A., 18, 31, 35 Erikson, E., 50 Felps, W., 90, 97 Felton, E. L., 16, 50 Ferrell, L., 16, 53, 220 Ferrell, O. C., 16, 30, 53 Ferris, G. R., 147 Festinger, L., 140 Field, H., 54 Filipczak, P., 171, 173 Finn, C. E. Jr., 198 Finney, R., 175 Fisher, D. G., 33, 38 Flynn, R. S., 92

253

Fong, C. T., 196 Fontrodona, W. M., 16 Ford, J. K., 30, 32, 38 Foster, V., 4 Fox, L., 54 Frauman, E., 54 Frederick, W., 50 Freedman, B., 145 Freeman, D., 90, 97 Freire, P., 185 Friedrich, T. L., 19, 21 Frink, D. D., 147 Gaddis, B., 39, 42 Galein, B. M., 4 Galinsky, A. D., 145 Gallucci, M., 145 Garaventa, E., 219–220 Gasper, L. C., 89 Gaudine, A., 19 Gentile, M. C., 107, 111, 113–114, 116–120, 123, 125–126, 131, 231, 233 Gerde, V. W., 234, 236 Ghoshal, S., 4, 102, 174 Giacalone, R. A., 4, 16, 50, 58, 174, 176, 212, 220 Giambatista, R. C., 40 Gibson, D. G., 236 Gilin, D., 145 Gillespie, J., 225–226, 234, 236 Ginzberg, E., 102 Gioia, D. A., 177, 224, 231 Glenn, J. R., 16 Godfrey, E. S., 6, 22, 39, 41–42 Godwin, L., 171, 175, 177, 179, 181 Goldhagen, D., 194 Goldstein, I. L., 30, 38 Gonin, M., 95 Goodwyn, L., 205 Gordan, G. L., 173, 176 Gordon, R. A., 197 Gosling, M., 157 Gotlieb, C. C., 225–226 Govorun, O., 145 Gowen, C. R., 225

254

Author Index

Granitz, N., 32, 36 Graves, S. B., 175 Green, K. C., 197 Gresham, L. G., 16, 30 Gross, J. J., 19 Guertler, B., 128 Habermas, T., 19 Haidt, J., 19, 113 Halbesleben, J., 146 Hall, E., 203 Hall, P. D., 196 Hambrick, D. C., 196 Hanna, N., 225 Hansen, E. G., 5 Harris, C., 220, 225–226 Harris, R., 157 Harris, S., 54 Harris, S. G., 18 Hart, D. W., 217 Hartman, E. M., 95 Hartman, L. P., 4, 51, 95, 156, 225–227, 234, 236 Havnes, A., 92 Hawley, D. D., 225, 227 Heapy, E. D., 141 Heifetz, R. A., 121 Helgeson, J. G., 4 Helton-Fauth, W., 39, 42 Henle, C. A., 225–226, 234–235 Heriot, K., 175 Higgins, E. T., 140 Hill, A., 54 Hill, J. H., 6, 16–18, 20–23, 31, 35–39, 41–42 Hill, N. C., 218 Hillman, A., 5 Hinkin, T. R., 156 Hochwarter, W. A., 147 Hoffman, W. M., 4, 225–227, 234, 236 Hofstede, G., 158 Hogarth, R. M., 19, 115 Hoover, D., 40 Horn, L. C., 90–91 Hornsby, J., 188 Hougen, D. F., 6, 22, 39, 41–42

Howell, J. E., 197 Huang, C. J., 5 Huang, H. J., 155, 157, 160 Huang, J. L., 32 Huehn, M. P., 197 Humphreys, J., 125 Hung, Y., 160 Hunt, S.D., 16–17 Ibsen, H., 88, 236 Ingols, C., 107, 126 Ishiguro, K., 88 Iverson, R., 156 Ivy, M., 54 Jacobs, L. W., 225 James, L. R., 40 Jaramillo, J. F., 28 Jensen, M. C., 162 John, O. P., 26 Johnson-Laird, P. N., 18, 30 Jones, C., 37 Jones, G. E., 220, 225, 227, 234, 236 Jones, G. R., 161 Jones, R. T., 176 Jones, T. M., 16, 30 Joyce, J., 88 Jurkiewicz, C. L., 220 Kacmar, C. J., 147 Kahneman, D., 26 Kannan, V. R., 173–174 Kansas, D., 50 Kant, I., 85 Kanter, R. M., 212 Kasser, T., 18 Kasworm, C. E., 178 Kavathatzopoulos, I., 30, 225 Kekes, J., 52 Kelley, L., 208 Kemmerer, B., 6 Kennedy, J. C., 4 Kennedy, M. J., 90–91 Kennedy, P., 91–92 Keough, J., 235

Author Index Kerr, S., 150, 158 Kershaw, I., 194 Kesey, K., 88 Key, S., 195, 197 Keys, D. E., 225 Khurana, R., 173–175 Kidder, R. M., 115, 230 Kidwell, L. A., 225, 227, 234, 236 Kimball, B. A., 175 Kind, A., 80 King, E. W., 177 King, P. M., 178, 234, 236 Kirkpatrick, D. L., 38 Kitchener, K. S., 178 Kite, M., 188 Kligyte, V., 6, 22–23, 30–31, 35, 39, 41–42 Koehn, D., 16, 236 Koernig, S. K., 32, 36 Kohlberg, L., 17, 33 Kolb, D., 126, 181 Kolb, R., 51 Kolodinsky, R. W., 147 Kolodner, J. L., 31, 34 Koole, S. L., 145 Korbar, T., 40 Korten, D., 50 Koslowski, P., 5 Kouzes, J. M., 121, 136 Krehmeyer, D., 95 Kruger, J., 143 Kuhn, T. S., 203 Kurpis, L. V., 4 Kushner, R. J., 195–196 LaBrasseur, R., 92 Ladenson, R., 60 Lampe, M., 178 Lane, I. F., 4 Lang, I. H., 126 Langella, I., 5 Lankard, B. B., 178 Laszlo, C., 173 Latane, B., 231 LeBreton, J. M., 40 LeClair, D. T., 220

255

Leigh, J., 50 Leonard, V., 92 Leppel, K., 197 Leroy, H., 135–136, 140, 144, 146 Levin, C., 50 Levin, R.I., 205 Levy, E. S., 92 Levy, O., 208 Lewin, K., 186 Lim, V. K. G., 90, 97 Locander, W. B., 28 Locke, E. A., 90 Loe, T. W., 16 Loeb, S. E., 38, 234–235 Loher, B. T., 27 Loo, J., 4 Lopez, Y. P., 33 Luna-Arocas, R., 54 Luthans, F., 141 Lux, S., 147 Lykins, E. L. B., 145 Maak, T., 5 Maddux, W. W., 145 Magjuka, R. J., 27 Mainardes, E. W., 5 Makridakis, S., 19 Maner, J. K., 234 Mangan, K., 76 Mansﬁeld, P., 16 Marcy, R. T., 6, 22, 39, 41–42 Margolis, J., 123 Markowitsch, H. J., 114 Markus, H. R., 19 Martin, K. D., 28 Martin, L. E., 25 Mason, P. A., 196 Matten, D., 4 Mayer, R. C., 99 Mayhew, M. J., 234, 236 McAdams, C. R., 4 McCabe, D. L., 50, 74, 91, 92, 98, 225, 227 McCarthy, D. J., 4 McConnaughy, E., 68 McCoy, B. H., 125

256

Author Index

McGregor, H. A., 138 McInnis-Bowers, C., 176 McKeon, R., 195–196, 202 McLean, B., 50 McNelly, T. L., 40 McWilliams, V., 32, 36 Mead, N. L., 234 Melchar, D. E., 95 Merrill-Sands, D., 126 Merritt, J., 101 Messick, D. M., 26 Meyerson, D., 173 Milgram, S., 231 Miller, A., 217 Miller, H., 88 Miller, R. A., 4 Milton, L., 140 Mintz, S. M., 16 Mintzberg, H., 4, 174 Mobley, M. E., 125 Montgomery, G. E., 40 Montuori, L., 220 Moon, J., 4 Moore, D. A., 26–27 Morgan, G., 172 Motowidlo, S. J., 37 Mueser, K., 54 Mulki, J. P., 28 Mulligan, T. M., 207 Mumford, M. D., 6, 16–25, 30–31, 33–39, 41–42 Murphy, S. T., 6, 16–18, 20–24, 30–31, 33–39, 41–42 Myring, M., 173, 175 Nahavandi, A., 32, 36 Narayanan, V. K., 6 Navarro, P., 174 Nelson, C. A., 198, 204 Nesteruk, J., 175 Neville, M. G., 171, 175, 177, 179, 181 Nicholas, A., 35 Nicholson, C. Y., 4, 91 Nocera, J., 50 Nohria, N., 128

Noordsy, D., 54 Norcross, J., 54 Obermueler, S. R., 175 O’Connor, F., 88 Oddo, A. R., 32 O’Fallon, M. J., 16 Olendzki, N., 145 Olson L. M., 157 Olson-Buchanan, J.B., 33 O’Neill, R., 126 Ostas, D. T., 234–235 O’Toole, J., 40, 174 Ottaway, R. N., 220, 225, 227, 234, 236 Oyserman, D., 19 Pace, C. R., 197 Paine, L. S., 50, 125 Painter-Morland, M. J., 16 Palanski, M. E., 136, 140, 144, 156–157 Parboteeah, K. P., 27 Parks, D., 175, 179, 181 Patron, H., 91–92 Peirce, C., 80 Peirce, E., 4, 225–227, 234, 236 Perrewe´, P. L., 147 Perry, T., 54 Perry, W. G., 178 Peterson, T. O., 183 Petrick, J. A., 49, 50–53, 57–58 Pfeffer, J., 4, 91–92, 196 Philips, A., 176 Phillips, D. T., 235 Phillips, S. M., 29, 37, 90 Pierson, F. C., 197 Piper, T., 128 Pless, N. M., 5 Poff, D. C., 95 Posner, B. Z., 121, 136 Pritchard, M., 51 Procario-Foley, E. G., 32, 92 Prochaska, J., 54, 68 Proserpio, L., 177 Puffer, S. M., 4 Purohit, Y., 235

Author Index Quinn, J., 50–52 Quinn, R. E., 57, 141 Raelin, J., 175 Raines, C., 173 Raisner, J. A., 225 Raj, R., 60 Rakovski, C. C., 92 Raposo, M., 5 Rasche, A., 50 Rashid, T., 60 Ravitch, D., 198 Rechner, P. L., 33 Reed, A., 90, 97 Reichwald, R., 5 Reisser, L., 178 Rest, J. R., 17, 30, 33 Reynolds, S. J., 16 Ribot, T., 80 Riesbeck, C. K., 31, 34 Rimer, S., 197 Ritter, B. A., 16, 30, 92 Robak, R., 177 Roberts, L. M., 141 Robertson, D. C., 220–221, 225–226 Robertson, D. U., 98 Robin, J., 40 Robins, R. W., 26 Roca, E., 210 Rodriguez, P., 5 Rogelberg, S. G., 35 Roskelley, K., 91–92 Rossett, R. N., 196 Rossouw, G., 53 Roth, M., 196 Rowe, M., 16 Ruegger, D., 177 Ryan, R. M., 140, 145 Rynes, S., 50 Sanyal, R. N., 220 Sauers, D. A., 4 Savage, G., 146 Schank, R. C., 31, 34 Schein, E. H., 97

Scherer, K., 50 Scherer, R., 57 Schmidt, C. D., 4 Schmitt, N., 37 Schneider, C. G., 174 Schoorman, F. D., 99 Schriesheim, C. A., 156 Schweitzer, K., 177 Scott, G., 39, 42 Segal, D., 173 Senchack, A. J., 174–175, 179, 181 Senge, P., 200 Sevier, S. T., 6, 22, 30–31, 35, 39, 41–42 Sextl, M., 5 Shapiro, M., 126 Shapiro, S. L., 145 Sharp, D., 16, 33 Shaw, 88 Sheldon, K. M., 18 Shen, X., 4 Sheppard, J. P., 220, 223 Shotland, A., 38 Siegel, D. S., 5 Simola, S. K., 36 Simons, T., 135–136, 140, 144–146, 150, 156–157 Simpson, R. L., 34 Sims, R. R., 16–17, 30, 50, 156, 188 Small, M. W., 207 Smith, B., 188 Smith, J., 18 Smith, K., 50 Smith-Crowe, K., 16, 30 Solis, B., 173 Solomon, R., 57 Sonenshein, S., 16 Sophocles., 88 Sorenson, R. L., 40 Spreitzer, G. M., 141 Srivastva, S., 156 Stachowicz-Stanusch, A., 3, 5 Stahl, G., 5 Stenmark, C. K., 24–25 Stephens, A. A., 173–174 Stephens, C. U., 156

257

258

Author Index

Stewart, I., 54 Stookey, S., 193 Sutarso, T., 54 Swanson, D. L., 4, 33, 38, 50, 212 Tamborski, M., 25 Tan, A., 88 Tang, T., 54 Tannenbaum, S. I., 38 Tassabehji, R., 91, 97 Taylor, G., 50 Taylor, S., 208 Tenbrunsel, A. E., 16, 30 Thiel, C. E., 23, 25 Thiel, C. E., 24 Thomas, D. A., 173 Thomas, R. R., 173 Thompson, J. A., 217 Thompson, K. R., 4, 16, 50, 212 Thorne, L., 19 Thurston, E., 173 Tofﬂer, B. L., 236 Tomlinson, E., 136 Trank, C., 50 Traver, H., 38 Treadway, D. C., 147 Trefalt, S., 107, 126 Trevino, L., 50–51 Trevin˜o, L. K., 4, 16, 26–27, 30, 74, 91–92, 98, 156, 161, 225, 227, 236 True, S.L., 53 Tsui, A., 202 Tsui, A. S., 147 Tulving, E., 114 Tversky, A., 26 Twenge, J. M., 35, 177 Tyler, C., 54 Tyler, J., 54 Unruh, G., 50 Van Dissel, B., 123 Van Es, R., 219–220

Van Fleet, D. D., 183 VanderMey, A., 230 Vega, G., 90, 95 Velicer, W., 68 Vert, A., 22, 30–31, 35 Veyne, P., 204 Victor, B., 27 Vitell, S. J., 16–17 Vojta, G., 102 Waddock, S., 50, 175 Wadsworth, L. L., 217 Waldman, D. A., 4, 40 Wallace, J., 91, 97 Walsh, J., 156 Walters, P., 60 Wang, C., 50 Wang, X., 24–25 Wankel, C., 3–5, 90, 97 Waples, E. P., 6, 15–18, 20–24, 30–31, 33–35, 38–39, 41–42 Wasieleski, D. M., 234, 236 Waters, R. D., 5 Weaver, G. R., 16, 51, 236 Weber, J. A., 16, 31–32, 234, 236 Weekly, J. A., 37 Weidner, C., 235 Weiner, J., 225–226, 234, 236 Weiss, D. E., 225 Werhane, P., 50 Westerman, J., 177 Weston, A., 51, 53–54 White, J. B., 145 Whittier, N., 53 Wick, M., 176 Widener, S. K., 5 Willems, C., 220 Williams, S., 53 Wilson, F., 126 Wilson, S., 88 Wipperfurth, H., 220–221 Wooten, K. C., 39

Author Index Worden, S., 156 Worthley, R., 208 Wright, F. W., 195, 197 Yammarino, F. J., 136, 140, 156–157 Yonkers, V., 225, 227, 234, 236 Young, M., 220, 223

Zaffron, S., 162 Zane, L. J., 6 Zappone, M., 177 Zemke, R., 173 Zgheib, P. W., 90, 95 Zhexembayeva, N., 173 Zimny, S. T., 98 Zinn, H., 205 Zlotkowski, E., 57

259

Subject Index

AACSB, 6, 17, 29, 37, 90, 93, 95, 173, 176, 195, 212 Academic administrators’ perceptions, 7, 89–102 Accounting, 27, 93, 94, 96, 109, 127–128, 196, 200, 204 Assessment, 4, 6, 15, 17, 37, 40, 41, 53, 54, 58, 107–108, 121, 129, 140, 147, 187 Assessment of Learning (AoL), 121, 129 Assumptions, 4, 17, 26, 29, 57, 98, 108, 144, 186, 201–203, 211–212 Behavioral integrity, 135, 136, 155, 156, 157, 159, 161, 162 Big picture, 199, 200, 208, 212 Business, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 73–87, 89–102, 107–132, 140, 143, 144, 148, 149, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 185, 187, 188, 193–213, 217–239 Business education, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 75, 89–102, 107, 171, 172, 179, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 221, 227 Business ethics, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 16–17, 19, 26, 29, 30, 32, 33, 37–38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47, 73–87, 89, 92, 93–97, 102, 107, 108, 109, 111, 112, 113, 114, 120, 217–239 Business schools, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 16, 29, 30, 34, 37, 40, 42, 50, 74, 75, 76, 79, 89–102, 110, 121, 126, 177, 188, 195, 196, 218 Case, 6, 7, 16, 26, 31, 34, 37, 57, 60, 61, 65, 69, 74–75, 77, 78–79, 82, 83, 84, 86, 90, 100, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 146, 150, 158, 159, 182, 193, 195,

196, 206, 220, 221, 224, 225, 226, 231, 232, 234, 236 Case study, 33, 34, 78, 220, 221, 225, 234–235 College of William and Mary, 7 Collegiate experience, the complete, 10, 15, 218, 237–239 Communication skills, 142, 146–147 Confucianism, 8, 155, 156, 159 Creativity, 58, 111, 132, 178 Curriculum, 6, 7–8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 37, 39, 81, 90, 92, 93, 107–108, 109, 111, 113, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 173, 174, 176, 183, 185, 186, 188, 199, 205, 224, 226, 236 Decision, 6, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 51, 55, 56, 69, 74, 78, 86, 90, 92, 95, 97, 99, 109, 113, 114, 120, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 137, 145, 155, 158, 161, 162, 166, 167, 178, 181, 182, 184, 185, 186, 203, 211, 219, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 228, 229, 230, 236, 237, 238 Democracy, 175, 193, 194, 195, 200, 205, 212 Disciplinary divides, 130, 175, 184, 199, 212, 237 Elites, 9, 195, 196, 199 Elitism, 9, 193–213 Empowerment, 92 Ethical behavior, beneﬁts of, 221–222 Ethical behavior, inﬂuences on, 222–224 Ethical issues, understanding of in business environments, 3, 27, 52, 54, 86, 109, 121, 224, 226, 236 Ethical leadership, 16, 26, 29, 36, 217, 219, 233–237 Ethical organizations, creating and managing, 235–236

262

Subject Index

Ethical professional behavior, developing commitment to, 227–230 Ethical sensitivity, 221, 238 Ethical theories, application of in business contexts, 226–227 Ethical understanding, personal, 219–224 Ethics, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15–42, 49–50, 51, 52, 53–58, 60–61, 65–68, 69, 73–87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93–97, 102, 107, 108, 109, 111–114, 120, 121, 125, 129, 130, 139, 142, 157, 162, 193, 194, 199, 217–239 Ethics development, 218 Ethics education, 6, 10, 15–42, 50, 53, 54, 57, 58, 74, 76, 90, 107, 111, 217–239 Exercise, 5, 8, 39, 51, 57, 81, 84, 107, 110, 111, 113–114, 115, 117, 119–120, 141, 145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 156, 175, 226, 232, 233–235 Exploratory analysis, 89, 102 Gender, 126 Giving Voice to Values (GVV), 7, 107–132 Global, 208–210 Good judgment, 232–233 History, 195–198, 204–206 Holistic management education, 171–189 Humanities, 174, 175, 180, 188 Indicator of Readiness for Management Ethics Inquiry (IRMEI), 6, 49, 50, 53–58, 59, 60, 61, 65–68 Instructional design, 31, 32, 42 Instrumentality, 9, 50, 82, 197, 205, 211, 212 Integrated business curriculum, 31 Integrity, 3–10, 41, 49–62, 69, 89–103, 107–132, 135–151, 155–163, 179–183, 193–211, 194, 198–211 Interdependence, 200 Intra-Organizational Ethics Bowl Event (IEBE), 6, 49, 50, 56, 60–61 Leader development, 135–151 Leader integrity, 135–151

Leadership, 3, 4, 10, 16, 20, 26, 27, 29, 36, 50, 51, 61, 82, 107, 109, 111, 113, 114, 117, 121, 128–129, 136, 138, 145, 146, 147, 173, 196, 198, 199, 217, 233, 235, 237, 238 Learning, 15, 28, 32, 34–35, 38–39, 142–144 Liberal arts, 9, 110, 193–213 Liberal education, 9, 171–189 Local, 208–210 Management Integrity Capacity, 6, 49–61 Marketing, 33, 109, 110, 131, 160, 200 Marriott School Model, 217–239 Moral courage, development of, 230–231 Moral imagination, 6–7, 73, 81–82, 86, 87 Moral reasoning, effective communication of, 232 Operations, 19, 28, 60, 109, 178 Organizational responsibility, models of, 236–237 Organizational savvy, 218, 230–233 Pedagogy, 6, 16, 108, 110, 130, 131, 230, 231, 234 Positive change, 141 Power, 99, 111, 112, 128, 132, 158, 187, 194, 198, 199, 208, 212 Power and inﬂuence, exercised for good, 233–235 Practice, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 17, 19, 29, 32, 35, 36, 41–42, 80, 84, 90, 99, 100, 110, 112, 113, 115, 117, 121, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 136, 137, 139, 141, 144, 147, 195, 199, 202, 203–204, 207, 210, 212, 219, 227, 233, 235, 236–237 Pragmatist, 125, 155 Pre-scripting (and scripts), 109, 110, 111 Private colleges, 195 Privilege, 9, 115, 176, 193, 197, 198, 205, 208, 211 Process Integrity Capacity Auction (PICA), 6, 49, 50, 55, 58–60, 69–71

Subject Index Reasons and rationalizations, 109, 113, 116–118, 119, 120, 129 Research, 8, 9, 16, 19, 21–23, 37, 40, 42, 49, 53, 58, 60, 86, 92, 98, 102, 109, 115, 121, 135, 136, 139, 140, 142, 143, 145, 147, 156, 162, 171, 173, 178, 179, 183, 195, 209, 212, 220, 221, 222, 230, 237 Scenario analysis, 159–160 Self-awareness, 144–146 Self-conﬁdence, 199, 209, 210 Sensemaking, 6, 15–42 Simmons (School of Management), 7, 111, 121–130 Skills, 7, 8, 15, 57, 59, 60, 78, 99, 108, 113, 132, 137, 139, 142, 147, 151, 171, 173, 175, 176, 183, 184, 187, 188, 197, 203, 219, 230, 233, 238 Social segregation, 194, 212 Students MBA, 7, 8–9, 50, 74, 107, 121–122, 155, 160, 171, 177, 178 Students Undergraduate, 137, 171, 172, 178, 179, 180, 184, 188–189

263

Tale of Two Stories, 110, 113–116, 118, 120, 131 Teaching materials, 77, 122, 233 Tools, 4, 5, 7, 20, 27, 37, 42, 49–61, 140, 207 TVA model, 155, 160, 162 Undergraduate business education, 171, 179, 193, 195, 197, 199–200 Values, 3, 7–8, 10, 15, 18, 20, 26–27, 29, 32–33, 36, 49, 59, 60, 69, 70, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 107–132, 135, 142, 144, 150, 158–159, 171, 198, 199, 202, 203, 205, 209, 210, 219–221, 222, 227, 230, 232–233, 238 Values, personal, 18, 27, 59, 144, 145, 219–221, 238 Values conﬂicts, 109, 110, 111, 114, 116, 123, 124, 126 Voice, 9, 26, 59, 60, 109, 112, 113, 114, 115, 118, 119, 124, 125, 128, 129, 130–132, 140, 155, 156–158, 166, 210–211 Voicing values, 112, 115, 120