Comparing the ethical predisposition of university students in five English-speaking countries : an examination of 14 questionable business practices

Recent years have seen intense scrutiny focused on the reported ethical breaches of enterprises across the globe. At the forefront of the accompanying criticism are the actions of giant American firms such as WorldCom, Arthur Anderson, and Enron. However, such deviations from acceptable standards of conduct have not been confined to the American market. Australia endured its era of “corporate excess” in the 1980s [Milton-Smith, 1997]. As a result, a spate of ethics-based research was undertaken in the early 1990s. More recently, China has been identified as a major venue for behavior deemed to be unacceptable, even unsafe. Issues such as counterfeit fashion items, software, and automobile parts have been a concern for several years [Gonzalez, 2007]. Perhaps more disconcerting are the recent recalls of children’s products, many of which were produced for leading toy companies such as Mattel and Fisher-Price, because of the use of dangerous lead-based paint. As one might anticipate, news reports and consumer protection agencies have been quick to condemn any action that falls within the “controversial” category. Indeed, many segments of society characterize such actions as unethical behavior. One result of this increased level of concern is the higher level of attention given to ethics in higher education programs. Even accreditation bodies such as AACSB have virtually mandated the integration of ethics into the curriculum. As a consequence, academicians have ramped up their ethics-based research agendas.

Examining the issues and dynamics of ethical dilemmas faced by school leaders

The roles and responsibilities of school leaders in most countries across the world have become more complex and challenging in recent years. In large part, this complexity has resulted from the discontinuously changing contexts and day-to-day dynamics within which principals lead their schools. Indeed, principals are now faced with having to make a plethora of decisions in an environment of competing priorities, and with consideration for the interests of students, teachers, parents and the school and wider community. Many of these decisions present as dilemmas for school leaders, where the choices for action often involve not just choosing from ‘right’ versus ‘wrong’ alternatives but also frequently from ‘right’ versus ‘right’ alternatives (Kidder, 1995). Underlying many such decisions are issues of values, principles and ethics. Dilemmas of an ethical nature arise such that principals enter a complicated ‘minefield’ of decision-making (Dempster & Berry, 2003) where significant implications results not only for those at the core of the particular decisions but also potentially for the wider school community and beyond.

Developing a multi-dimensional scale for ethical decision making: the managerial ethical profile (MEP)

This article describes the development and validation of a multi-dimensional scale for measuring managers’ perceptions of the range of factors that routinely guide their decision-making processes. An instrument for identifying managerial ethical profiles (MEP) is developed by measuring the perceived role of different ethical principles in the decision-making of managers. Evidence as to the validity of the multidimensionality of the ethical scale is provided, based on the comparative assessment of different models for managerial ethical decision-making. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) supported a eight-factor model including two factors for each of the main four schools of moral philosophy. Future research needs and the value of this measure to business ethics are discussed.

Shareholder values, not shareholder value : the role of 'ethical funds' and 'ethical entrepreneurs' in connecting shareholders' values with their investments

This article rebuts the still-common assumption that managers of capitalist entities have a duty, principally or even exclusively, to maximise the monetary return to investors on their investments. It argues that this view is based on a misleadingly simplistic conception of human values and motivation. Not only is acting solely to maximise long-term shareholder value difficult, it displays, at best, banal single-mindedness and, at worst, sociopathy. In fact, real investors and managers have rich constellations of values that should be taken account of in all their decisions, including their business decisions. Awareness of our values, and public expression of our commitment to exemplify them, make for healthier investment and, in the long term, a healthier corporate world. Individuals and funds investing on the basis of such values, in companies that express their own, display humanity rather than pathology. Preamble I always enjoyed the discussions that Michael Whincop and I had about the interaction of ethics and economics. Each of us could see an important role for these disciplines, as well as our common discipline of law. We also shared an appreciation of the institutional context within which much of the drama of life is played out. In understanding the behaviour of individuals and the choices they make, it seemed axiomatic to each of us that ethics and economics have a lot to say. This was also true of the institutions in which they operate. Michael ·had a strong interest in 'the new institutional economics' I and I had a strong interest in 'institutionalising ethics' right through the 1990s.' This formed the basis of some fascinating and fruitful discussions. Professor Charles Sampford is Director, Key Centre for Ethics, Law, Justice and Governance, Foundation Professor of Law at Griffith University and President, International Institute for Public Ethics.DrVirginia Berry is a Research Fellow at theKey Centre for Ethics, Law,Justice andGovernance, Griffith University. Oliver Williamson, one of the leading proponents of the 'new institutional economics', published a number of influential works - see Williamson (1975, 1995,1996). Sampford (1991),' pp 185-222. The primary focus of discussions on institutionalising ethics has been in public sectorethics: see, for example, Preston and Sampford (2002); Sampford (1994), pp 114-38. Some discussion has, however, moved beyond the public sector to include business - see Sampford 200408299

Australian media ethics regime and ethical risk management

Media organizations are simultaneously key elements of an effective democracy and, for the most part, commercial entities seeking success in the market. They play an essential role in the formation of public opinion and the influence on personal choices. Yet most of them are commercial enterprises seeking readers or viewers, advertising, favorable regulatory decisions for their media, and other assets. This creates some intrinsic difficulties and produces some sharp tensions within media ethics. In this article, we examine such tensions—in theory and practice. We then consider the feasibility of introducing an ethics regime to the media industry—a regime that would be effective in a deregulated environment in protecting public interest and social responsibility. In the article, we also outline a rationale and a methodology for the institutionalization of an acceptable and workable media ethics regime that aims to protect the integrity of the industry in a future of undoubtedly increasing commercial pressure.

Accountability, transparency, impartiality, and other ethical issues : improving democracy reduces violence

Violence is detrimental to the stability of any democracy. If people are too scared to vote, or if they lack confidence in their government to bring peace, how will their voices be heard? By discussing how accountability, transparency, and ethics dissuade social confusion, improve democracy, and lessen occurrences of violence, perhaps one can increase the success in the instance of stabilizing a new democracy or reinvigorating an old one. Theoretically resulting in more peaceful governmental transitions; accountability, transparency, and ethics in democracy are a must to build social trust, improve democracy, and reduce violence.

The emotional manipulation-psychopathy nexus : relationships with emotional intelligence, alexithymia, and ethical position

This research examined for the first time the relationship between emotional manipulation, emotional intelligence, and primary and secondary psychopathy. As predicted, in Study 1 (N = 73), emotional manipulation was related to both primary and secondary psychopathy. Only secondary psychopathy was related to perceived poor emotional skills. Secondary psychopathy was also related to emotional concealment. Emotional intelligence was negatively related to perceived poor emotional skills, emotional concealment, and primary and secondary psychopathy. In Study 2 (N = 275), two additional variables were included: alexithymia and ethical position. It was found that for males, primary psychopathy and emotional intelligence predicted emotional manipulation, while for females emotional intelligence acted as a suppressor, and ethical idealism and secondary psychopathy were additional predictors. For males, emotional intelligence and alexithymia were related to perceived poor emotional skills, while for females emotional intelligence, but not alexithymia, predicted perceived poor emotional skills, with ethical idealism acting as a suppressor. For both males and females, alexithymia predicted emotional concealment. These findings suggest that the mechanisms behind the emotional manipulation–psychopathy relationship differ as a function of gender. Examining the different aspects of emotional manipulation as separate but related constructs may enhance understanding of the construct of emotional manipulation.

The aesthetico-ethical subject : another narrative about being ethically responsible

This paper builds on work I presented at the PESA conference in 2007, which moved through both aesthetic and ethical theory to generate a new theory of creative integrity around the issues of autonomy, agency and authenticity. This preliminary theorizing had its origins in my undergraduate ethics classroom where I was confronted with advertising students who resisted the idea of being taught ethics, along with all the philosophical ethical theories traditionally used to do this.

Conceptualising a Chinese corporate governance framework : tensions between tradition, ideologies and modernity

Reflects on the challenges facing China's efforts to reform its corporate governance framework, and the extent to which the modernisation can be reconciled with the country's cultural traditions. Examines the development of China's legal and economic reforms since 1978, the debate which these have generated ad the shortcomings of the current corporate governance regime. Discusses how Confucian principles might be applied to issues of director's duties and corporate governance, and explains the benefits of such an approach.

Expanding ethical vistas of IT professionals

In this paper we argue for an experientially grounded view of IT professionals’ ethical formation and support. We propose that for such formation and support to be effectual, it should challenge professionals’ conceptualisations of their field and of ethics, and it should do so with the aim of changing their experience. To this end, we present a Model of Ethical IT, which is based on an examination of the nature of ethics and on empirical findings concerning IT professionals’ experience of ethics. We argue that for IT professionals to be enabled to become more ethical in their practice: the purpose of IT must be primarily understood to be user-oriented; the nature of professional ethics must be primarily understood to be other-centred; and the goal of ethics education must be understood as primarily promoting a change in awareness.

The stewardship paradigm : an enquiry into the ethical obligation associated with being in control of resorces

The resource allocation and utilization discourse is dominated by debates about rights particularly individual property rights and ownership. This is due largely to the philosophic foundations provided by Hobbes and Locke and adopted by Bentham. In our community, though, resources come not merely with rights embedded but also obligations. The relevant laws and equitable principles which give shape to our shared rights and obligations with respect to resources take cognizance not merely of the title to the resource (the proprietary right) but the particular context in which the right is exercised. Moral philosophy regarding resource utilisation has from ancient times taken cognizance of obligations but with ascendance of modernity, the agenda of moral philosophy regarding resources, has been dominated, at least since John Locke, by a preoccupation with property rights; the ethical obligations associated with resource management have been largely ignored. The particular social context has also been ignored. Exploring this applied ethical terrain regarding resource utilisation, this thesis: (1) Revisits the justifications for modem property rights (and in that the exclusion of obligations); (2) Identifies major deficiencies in these justifications and reasons for this; (3) Traces the concept of stewardship as understood in classical Greek writing and in the New Testament, and considers its application in the Patristic period and by Medieval and reformist writers, before turning to investigate its influence on legal and equitable concepts through to the current day; 4) Discusses the nature of the stewardship obligation,maps it and offers a schematic for applying the Stewardship Paradigm to problems arising in daily life; and, (5) Discusses the way in which the Stewardship Paradigm may be applied by, and assists in resolving issues arising from within four dominant philosophic world views: (a) Rawls' social contract theory; (b) Utilitarianism as discussed by Peter Singer; (c) Christianity with particular focus on the theology of Douglas Hall; (d) Feminism particularly as expressed in the ethics of care of Carol Gilligan; and, offers some more general comments about stewardship in the context of an ethically plural community.

Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia

This article examines Finnis' and Keown's claim that the intention/foresight distinction should be used as the basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawing medical treatment, rather than the act/omission distinction which is currently used. I argue that whilst the intention/foresight distinction is sound and can apply to palliative pain relief hastening death, it cannot be applied to withholding and withdrawing medical treatment. Instead, the act/omission distinction remains the better basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawal, and law reform is consequently unnecessary.